IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.9377 of 2009 CHALITRA MAHTO, son of Shankar Mahto, resident of village- Harnahi, P.S.-Baruraj, Distt.-Muzaffarpur-----------------Petitioner. Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 15.4.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The marriage was solemnized on 2.10.2006 and there is allegation of demand, torture and even ousting the complainant from her matrimonial house which is defended on the ground that act of the complainant forced the petitioner to file a divorce case. No paper is filed regarding divorce case allegedly which has been filed on 15.11.2007 while the present complaint has been filed on 27.11.2007. A clear corroboration is there regarding differences and it appears to justify the act of torture. Petitioner is the husband and is solely responsible for the act of torture upon the complainant if that is followed by demand of dowry. Thus, I find it not a fit case for anticipatory bail. Prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected. Sudip ( Mandhata Singh, J )