IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellanious No.7725 of 2011 1.MUNI LAL MANDAL S/O LATE SHIBU MANDAL 2.SUNITA DEVI WIFE OF MUNI LAL MANDAL, 3.KOSHALYA DEVI WIFE OF DILIP MANDAL, ALL R/O VILLAGE-MIRDOUL, P.S. NARPATGANJ, DISTRICT-ARARIA. - Petitioners Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR - Opposite Party 3 11.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, who is armed with carbon copy of the case diary. The three petitioners are named accused in this case being parents-in law and sister in law of deceased daughter of the informant, who died within two years of her marriage after being subjected to some sort of torture, and demand of dowry. Even the body of the deceased was also disposed of without any information of her parents side. There appears nothing substantive against the two female petitioners no.2 and 3, Sunita Devi and Koshalya Devi. Consequently, the two petitioners no.2 and 3, in the event of their arrest or surrender within four weeks of 2 communication of the order are directed to be enlarged on bail on each of them furnishing bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Araria, in Narpatganj P.S. Case no. 91 of 2010, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure with additional condition that the petitioners shall remain present before the court below on each and every date till submission of the charge sheet. If the petitioners fail to remain present on two consecutive dates without any reasonable explanation the privilege granted shall be deemed to be cancelled. So far as petitioner no.1, Muni Lal Mandal, father in law of the deceased, is concerned, in view of nature of allegation of disposal of body without any intimation to deceased parents, this court is not inclined to grant him the privilege sought. Accordingly, the prayer is rejected. AAhmad ( Akhilesh Chandra, J.)