IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.44221 of 2009 Ganesh Yadav, son of Asharfi Yadav, resident of Village- Ramji Tola (Bhelahi) P.S. Nauhatta (Darhar O.P.) District- Saharsa. ………………………………………..Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Anila Devi, daughter of Bindeshwari Yadav, wife of Ganesh Yadav, resident of Village- Ramji Tola, P.S. Nauhatta (Darhar O.P.) District-Saharsa. ……Opposite Parties. ----------- 4. 19. 04. 2010. Heard Mr. Amarnath Jha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. Suraj Narain Yadav, learned counsel appearing on behalf of O.P.No. 2 and Mr. D. Mehta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Nauhatta P.S. Case No. 20 of 2008 dated 11. 03. 2008, registered under Sections 494, 498 A and 495/34 of the Indian Penal Code as also Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. This matter was heard at length on 01. 04. 2010 and on that date a common ground was taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner and O.P. No.2 that there are still chances of reconciliation of the entire dispute between both the parties and for that reason, the matter was adjourned and both sides were directed to remain physically present. This matter was called out in the last week and was passed over for two-three days for enabling the parties to enter into a compromise either for restoration of matrimonial relationship or for one time settlement. Unfortunately, when the matter was taken up today, it 2 has been informed by the learned counsel for the petitioner and O.P.No. 2 that despite their endeavour, compromise could not be arrived at. Furthermore, despite specific direction, though O.P. No. 2 is physically present in the Court but the petitioner is not present in the Court. According to the prosecution case, the petitioner is the husband of the informant and there is specific allegation of physical and mental torture to the informant and also demand of dowry by the petitioner. There is further allegation that the petitioner attempted to put burnt match stick on the body of the informant with kerosene oil. In that view of the matter, prayer for grant of anticipatory bail made on behalf of the petitioner is rejected. The petitioner must surrender in the court below within a period of four weeks from today and seek regular bail, if so advised. m.p. ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)