IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.27546 of 2008 1. DINESH MAHTO S/O HARI CHARAN MAHTO 2. ARUN DEVI D/O HARI CHARAN MAHTO ( BOTH R/OVILL. DEKLI BIND TOLA, P.S. BIHTA DIST. PATNA.) ----- PETITIONERS Versus STATE OF BIHAR ---- OPP. PARTY. ----------- For the petitioners: Mr.Manoj Kumar Pandey, Advocate. For the State: Mr. Choubey Jawahar, APP. 08. 27.04.2009 The two petitioners, who are brother and sister, have approached this court for grant of anticipatory bail in a case instituted under Sections 142, 498A, 304B, 201/34 of the Penal Code and Section ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act. Admittedly, the daughter of the informant died in the matrimonial home within seven years of marriage in a very suspicious circumstance. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that few months thereafter a compromise petition was filed which is on record as annexure-2. It is further contended that petitioner no.2 is the married ‘nand’ of the victim, whereas, petitioner no.1 is the ‘devar’. Having considered the submissions, this court is persuaded to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to petitioner no.2, namely, Arun Devi. In the event of her arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from today before the court below, petitioner no.2 is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two 2 sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the A. C.J.M. Barh, Dist. Patna, in connection with Bakhtiyarpur P.S. Case No. 32 of 2006, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code. So far as petitioner no.1, namely, Dinesh Mahto is concerned, no case for extension of anticipatory bail is made out. It is accordingly dismissed. It is made clear that in the event the petitioner surrenders within the time stipulated hereinabove and prays for regular bail the same shall be considered on its own merit uninfluenced by the order passed by this court in the present proceeding. Sym/ (Kishore K. Mandal, J.)