IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.15972 of 2009 1. AEHSAN @ MD.AEHSAN 2. Sikandar Ali 3. Bibi Gollnur Versus 1. The STATE OF BIHAR 2. Bibi Komela ----------- 2/ 13.05.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. For the marriage of three years earlier, petitioners have been alleged for making demand and causing cruelty for its non- fulfillment, while the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that petitioner no.1 is husband and he is ready to keep his wife with all dignity. Earlier, an attempt was also made but the complainant herself deserted him left him for her maika where she is residing. A case for restitution has been filed on his behalf earlier, but I find the restitution case during the relevant period as per complainant she was ousted, that can be made easily defence by filing a restitution case to save the skin but the differences exist there and the husband is solely responsible for the same. So, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail of petitioner no.1 is rejected. So far as petitioners no. 2 and 3 are concerned, they are parents of the husband and no such liability can be fixed upon them for the differences of the wife and husband. Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioners no. 2 and 3 for grant of anticipatory bail is allowed. In the event of arrest or surrender within one month 2 from today in connection with Complaint Case No. 4 of 2009, above named petitioners no. 2 and 3 shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Katihar subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of Cr. P.C. shail (Mandhata Singh, J.)