IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.3524 of 2010 1. SUKESH CHOUDHARY 2. SHANKAR CHOUDHARY 3. HARI NANDAN CHOUDHARY Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 01.02.2010 Heard. The petitioners are bothers-in-law as well as father-in-law of the informant. They seek anticipatory bail in a case initially instituted under section 498A, but subsequently converted into 302 IPC. Learned counsel placed the FIR before this Court in order to show that the allegations are definite and specific against the husband and the mother-in-law. There is general statement that these petitioners have also asked the informant to get a sum of Rs.one lakh from her father. This statement was made by the victim herself who died after 13 days of hospitalization. The contention is that that looking to the FIR it would appear that the petitioners have very little role to play. The allegations, according to the counsel, is directed against the husband as well as the mother-in-law. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioners abovenamed, in the event of arrest/surrender within four weeks from today, shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of ACJM, Danapur, Patna in connection with Danapur P.S. Case No. 317/2009, - 2 - subject to the condition as laid down under section 438(2) Cr.P.C. hr ( Kishore K. Mandal )