IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.8533 of 2010 1.DUKHI RAM son of Late Sukhlal Ram 2.Kamdeo Ram son of late Deoki Ram ………..Petitioners. Versus STATE OF BIHAR …………………………….O.P. ----------- 2 19.4.2010 Heard the parties. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with complaint caser No. 733 of 2006 corresponding to trial No. 343 of 2009 in which cognizance has been taken under section 420 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code. According to the prosecution case co-accused Sonamati Devi wife of petitioner no. 1, had taken loan of Rs. 25,000/- from the complainant for the purpose of marriage of her daughter. However, subsequently instead of returning the aforesaid money she signed an agreement for transfer of land in favour of complainant ,but it was found that those lands were not belonging to Sonamati Devi. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that main allegation of cheating is against co-accused Sonamati Devi and she has been granted regular bail by learned Sessions Court. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail made on behalf of the petitioners and submitted that petitioner no.1 being husband of co-accused Sonamati Devi is equally responsible for the entire transaction. However, he has fairly conceded that the specific role has not been assigned against the petitioner no.2 Kamdeo Ram, who happens to be Nandoshi of co-accused Sonamati Devi. Be that as it may, in the facts and circumstances of the case, and in view of the relation of petitioner no.2 with co-accused Sonamati Devi, - 2 - being her Nandoshi, in the event of his arrest or surrender in the court below within a period of four weeks from today petitioner Kamdo Ram shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of C.J.M, Aurangabad in connection with the above noted case, subject to the conditions laid down under section 438(2) Cr.P.C. However, so far petitioner no.1 Dukhi Ram is concerned, he being directly involved in the entire transaction, being the husband of co- accused- Sonamati Devi, his prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. He must surrender in the court below within a period of four weeks from today and, if so advised, seek regular bail. If such a petition is filed in the court below, then the same may be disposed of on its own merit without being prejudiced by the present order. (Birendra Prasad Verma, J) M.Rahman