IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.10208 of 2009 1. Amit Kumar @ Sintu Kumar @ Sintu S/O Sri Shekhar Kapri, 2. Shekhar Kapri S/o Late Yamuna Kapri, 3. Mithilesh Kapri S/o Late Yamuna Kapri, 4. Urmila Devi @ Gayatri Devi W/O Sri Shekhar Kapri, All are residents of village- Mohanpur, Police Station- Kharagpur, District- Munger. . . . . . Petitioners. Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2/ 11.06.2009 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no.2 Shekhar Kapari and petitioner no.4 Urmila Devi @ Gayatri Devi have been arrested. In the circumstances prayer on their behalf made in this application has become infructuous, which is accordingly dismissed. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. Petitioner nos.1 and 3, who are the nephew-in-law and elder-brother-in-law of the complainant are apprehending their arrest in connection with a case registered for the offence under Section 498 A of the Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. It is submitted on their behalf that petitioner no.1 is a student of an Engineering College at Chennai and is not responsible for the matrimonial dispute between the complainant and her husband and other members of the family. Petitioner no.3 who is the elder brother- in-law is separate from the husband of the complainant, who has already been released on bail by the court below. Let petitioner nos. 1 and 3, namely, Amit Kumar @ Sintu Kumar @ Sintu and Mithilesh Kapri surrender before the court below within four weeks from today and thereafter they should satisfy the - 2 - court below that petitioner no.1 is a student of an Engineering College at Chennai. In the event court below is satisfied, he (Amit Kumar @ Sintu Kumar @ Sintu) be admitted to the privilege of bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 5000/- (Rs. Five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khagaria in connection with Complaint Case No. 504 C of 2007,. So far petitioner no.3 (Mithilesh Kapri) is concerned his case should be considered by the court below in the light of the fact that the marriage is 11 years old and he is residing separately and the husband of the complainant has been released on bail. Uday/ (V. N. Sinha, J.)