IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.8608 of 2010 MD.SAZID Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 20.4.2010 Heard the parties. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with complaint case no. 3346 C of 2008 in which cognizance has been taken under section 498 A of the Indian penal Code. According to the prosecution case petitioner is husband of the complainant and there is allegation of demand of dowry and torture against the petitioner and other accused persons. It is also alleged that accused persons poured K. Oil upon the complainant and tried to burn her alive and finally she was driven out from her matrimonial house. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that now the matter has been compromised between the parties and, therefore, matter may be disposed of with a direction to the court below to verify the genuineness and bonafide of the compromise arrived at between the parties and on such verification pass the order finally. Be that as it may, in view of serious nature of allegation and in view of the fact that petitioner happens to be the husband of the complainant, his prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. Petitioner 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, then the same may be disposed of on its own merit without being prejudiced by the present order. However, while considering the prayer for bail made on behalf of the petitioner, the learned court below may try to secure the attendance of the complainant and may try to verify the bonafide and genuineness of the compromise arrived at between - 2 - them and then pass order in accordance with law. Let this order be communicated through fax at the cost of the petitioner to the court of C.J.M, Araria. (Birendra Prasad Verma, J) M.Rahman