IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.4926 of 2010 SUNIL SAH, son of Satya Narayan Sah Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2/ 30.03.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence under Section 498 (A) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The complainant alleges cruelty against the petitioner for non- fulfillment of demand of dowry. Learned counsel submits that the allegation is false and in fact the complainant’s brother wanted to grab the properties of the petitioner, for which the father of the petitioner had also filed a complaint case bearing Complaint Case no. 357 of 2008, as contained in Annexure-2. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is willing to keep the complainant with due care and affection. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail. His prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the court below (Sub- Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sasaram in connection with Complaint Case no. 361 of 2008) and seeks regular bail within eight weeks from today and if the complainant appears within the aforesaid time and express her desire to live with the petitioner then the learned Magistrate would dispose of the bail application in terms of the compromise petition without being prejudiced by this order. Uday/ (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)