IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.31126 of 2010 1. MUKESH KUMAR @ MUKESH SAO, S/O LATE SAHDEO SAO, 2. RAJESH KUMAR @ RAJESH SAO, S/O LATE SAHDEO SAO, 3. SANJEETA DEVI @ SANJEETA DEVI @ SANJUTA DEVI W/O GOPAL SAO. 4. SINDHU KUMARI, D/O LATE SAHDEO SAO, ALL R/O VILLAGE-LAKHANPUR, P.S. BHAGWANPUR, DISTRICT- BEGUSARAI. --PETITIONER Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR --OPP.PARTY 2 22.09.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The four petitioners are named in this case being in-laws of the informant carrying general allegation of demand of dowry, torture etc. Further, as submitted, dispute between the parties has already been resolved and, accordingly, petition of compromise has been filed and pending before the court below. If it is so and the informant by appearing as a witness supports factum of compromise with her free will and consent without any coercion and any male member from her side either father, brother or uncle appear as one of the bailors, the petitioners, in the event of their arrest or surrender within four weeks from today, are 2 directed to be enlarged on bail on each of them furnishing bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lakhisarai, in Surajgarha (Medni Chowki) P.S. Case no. 252 of 2009, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with additional condition that the petitioners no.1 and 2 shall remain present before the court below on each and every date for one year or till disposal of the case, whichever is earlier. If the petitioners no.1 and 2 fail to remain present on two consecutive dates without any reasonable explanation the privilege granted shall be deemed to be cancelled. (Akhilesh Chandra, J.) AAhmad