IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.37402 of 2008 NARESH YADAV Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR. ----------- 05. 09.04.2009 Heard both sides. The sole petitioner, who is husband of the complainant/ opposite party no.2, has approached this court for grant of anticipatory bail in a case instituted under Sections 498(A) and ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Admittedly, the marriage in the present case had taken place about 19 years ago. Records indicate that they are living separately for a petty long time. It further appears that a maintenance proceeding instituted at the instance of the complainant was decided in her favour whereunder the petitioner has to pay maintenance at the rate of two thousand per month. The story spelt out in the complaint, prima-facie, gives an impression that the dispute between the parties is over allocation of certain share in the property. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per order passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Jamui he is paying the maintenance amount to his wife. Learned counsel for the complainant admits before this court that some amount as per the order of the Family Court, has been paid although belatedly. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this court 2 is inclined to grant him the privilege of anticipatory bail. In the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within four weeks from today, let the petitioner, namely, Naresh Yadav be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- ( ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Jamui, in connection with Complaint Case no. 681( C)/2006, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is made clear that this order shall also be subject to the following condition: The petitioner shall continue to pay the maintenance to the complainant/Opposite party no.2 as directed under order dated 03.02.2009 passed in Case No. 19M/2006. In case of default in payment, the complainant shall bring the said fact to the notice of the court below supported by appropriate documents; the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bond of the petitioner if it is convinced that there has been default in making payment of the maintenance amount in favour of the complainant/ Opposite party no.2. Sym/ (Kishore K. Mandal, J.)