IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.28932 of 2011 Dilip Yadav, S/O-Uma Shankar Yadav Versus The State Of Bihar ----------- 02 13.09.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Petitioner being husband of the complainant’s daughter is languishing in jail custody since 03.07.2011 in a case in which cognizance has been taken under Sections 498(A) and 494 of the Indian Penal Code. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the complainant’s daughter was noticed by the learned Sessions Judge but she did not appear in spite of service of the notice. It is also contended by him that the complainant’s daughter, who is victim to the present case, has also not been examined in the court below and, as a matter of fact, the petitioner has already divorced the complainant’s daughter but after one and half years of the alleged occurrence, complainant has brought this false case against the petitioner to fetch money. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as period of detention of the petitioner in jail custody, 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 Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Siwan in connection with Complaint Case No. 827 of 2006. SHAHZAD ( Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J.)