IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.3887 of 2011 AMARJEET JHA, SON OF SRI SURESH JHA Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 02 18.03.2011 It is pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioner that some mistake has occurred in prayer portion of this application. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to make necessary corrections in prayer portion within course of the day. Supplementary affidavit is filed on behalf of the petitioner. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State assisted by learned counsel for the petitioner. Petitioner is husband of the deceased and admittedly, the marriage of the petitioner had taken place on 05.03.2003 and after marriage deceased gave birth to three children. Earlier, the petitioner had come before this Court with prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but his prayer for anticipatory bail was disposed of with direction to him to surrender in the court below and apply for regular bail, which should be considered by the concerned court in accordance with the law in the light of the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner at the time of consideration of the above stated petition of anticipatory bail. It appears that in compliance of the aforesaid order, the petitioner surrendered before the court below and moved his regular bail but did not find favour from learned Chief Judicial Magistrate and subsequently, he went to the Court of Sessions and prayed for regular bail but his prayer for bail was rejected by learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1st, Madhubani by passing a detailed order. Certain facts are admitted in this case. It is admitted that the deceased died after six years of the marriage and when the so-called eye-witnesses saw the deceased, they found her hanging from ceiling. It is the prosecution case itself, that the deceased was taken to the hospital by her in-laws and she died in the hospital and after that her post-mortem examination was done. The learned Additional Sessions Judge has rejected the prayer for bail of the petitioner only on the ground that some injuries were found on the person of the deceased at the time of post mortem examination but admittedly, after due investigation, police submitted charge sheet under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, though the submission of learned counsel for the informant is that charge has been framed under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code. Considering all the above stated pros and cons of the case, let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Fast Track Court- IV, Madhubani in connection with Bhairab Asthan P.S. Case No. 80 of 2009 (Sessions Trial No. 218 of 2011). Shahzad ( Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J.)