IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr Misc No 22797 of 2009 1 Ram Nandan Sharma, son of Sri Chamru Sharma 2 Pankaj Sharma @ Pankaj Kumar Sharma 3 Mritunjay Sharma @ Mritunjay Sharma, sons of Sri Ram Nandan Sharma 4 Smt Mina Devi @ Mina Devi, wife of Sri Ram Nandan Sharma, residents of Village – Bajitpur, P S – Vidyapatinagar, Dist – Samastipur -Petitioners Versus State of Bihar -Opposite Party W I T H Cr Misc No 27926 of 2009 Shashi Bhushan Sharma, son of Sri Ram Nandan Sharma, resident of Village – Bajitpur, P S – Vidyapatinagar, Dist – Samastipur -Petitioner Versus State of Bihar -Opposite Party *** For the petitioners : M/s Ram Suresh Roy, Sr Advocate & Kalika Nand Jha, Advocate For the S t a t e : Mr A A Khan, A P P *** 2 04.09.2009 Petitioners in Cr Misc No 22797 of 2009 are father-in- law, 2 brothers-in-law and mother-in-law of the complainant. Petitioner, in Cr Misc No 27926 of 2009 is the husband of the complainant. All of them apprehend arrest in Complaint Case No 2515C of 2008 under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code and ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act. In the complaint, it is alleged that immediately after the marriage when the girl went to her sasural, she was tortured, abused. The petitioners started demanding money for starting business. She was ultimately forced to leave the house. It is further alleged that the petitioners thereafter, on 09.11.2008, went to the complainant’s house and abused her and her family members and threatened them and asked the complainant to return to her matrimonial house. Thus, the complaint was filed on 12.11.2008. Heard the spirited argument of the learned counsel for the complainant. Heard Mr Ram Suresh Roy, learned Senior Counsel 2 appearing on behalf of the petitioner and also the State. It is pointed out that the marriage took place on 13.03.2008. The wife, right from beginning, was not ready to stay in the matrimonial house. She left the matrimonial house and, as such, the husband Shashi Bhushan Sharma, petitioner in Cr Misc No 27926 of 2009, was forced to file a case under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act on 29.08.2008 for restitution of conjugal rights. The present case has been filed after about 2 and ½ months thereof. He further states that inspite of knowledge of the case for restitution of conjugal rights, in the present anticipatory bail matter, the complainant was called and she flatly refuse to go back to the matrimonial house on alleged grounds of trauma still suffering. She has chosen not to appear in the restitution case. Notices have to be served through substituted process. That shows the true intention of the parties. Be that as it may, if the petitioners abovenamed surrender before the Court below within 4 weeks from today, they shall be released 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 Subdivisional Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai in Complaint Case No 2515C of 2008 subject to all conditions as laid down in Section 438 (2) of Criminal Procedure Code. M.E.H./ (Navaniti Prasad Singh)