IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.12605 of 2010 Shailesh Singh alias Salesh Singh, son of Kapil Singh, Resident of Village- Ladu, Police Station- Mohanpur, District- Gaya. ………………………………Petitioner. Versus The State of Bihar …………………… Opposite Party. With Cr.Misc. No.14252 of 2010 1. Vimala Devi, wife of Kapil Singh 2. Ram Pravesh Singh, son of Late Karu Singh, resident of Village- Ladu, Police Station-Mohanpur, District- Gaya. ……………………………………Petitioners. Versus The State of Bihar ……………………….Opposite Party. For the petitioners :- Mr. Partha Sarthy, Advocate. Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate. For the State :- Mr. Shantanu Kumar, A.P.P. ----------- 2. 11. 05. 2010. Heard the parties. In a criminal prosecution for offences under Sections 304 B, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code, accused Shailesh Singh @ Salesh Singh, petitioner in Cr. Misc. No. 12605 of 2010 is the husband of the deceased Seema Devi, whereas accused Vimala Devi and accused Ram Pravesh Singh, petitioners in Cr. Misc. No. 14252 of 2010 are mother-in-law and uncle-in-law of the deceased respectively. All the three petitioners are specifically named in the F.I.R. as accused. There is allegation of demand of dowry and torture as also their participation in crime in question. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that during the course of investigation and supervision, the independent witnesses have not supported the prosecution allegation against the petitioners and the Supervising Officer had doubted the correctness of the entire prosecution case. It is also highlighted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that so far, Petitioner No. 2 2 Ram Pravesh Singh of Cr. Misc. No. 14252 of 2010 is concerned, he is completely separate in mess and business from the husband of the deceased and therefore, he had no motive to participate in crime in question. Be that as it may, in view of relationship with the petitioner Shailesh Singh alias Salesh Singh in Cr. Misc. no. 12605 and petitioner Vimala Devi in Cr. Misc. No. 14252 of 2010, being husband and mother-in-law of the deceased, prayer for anticipatory bail made on behalf above named petitioners is rejected. They must surrender in the court below in connection with Barachatti (Mohanpur) P.S. Case No. 212/2009 within a period of four weeks from today and seek regular bail, if so advised, which shall be considered and disposed of on its own merit without being prejudiced by the present order. However, so far, petitioner Ram Pravesh Singh in Cr. Misc. No. 14252 of 2010 is concerned, he is uncle-in-law of the deceased and appears to be separate in mess and business with the husband of the deceased, in that view of the matter, in the event of his arrest/surrender in connection with Barachatti (Mohanpur) P.S. Case No. 212/2009 within a period of four weeks from today, he shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sherghati at Gaya, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of Cr.P.C. m.p. ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)