IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.9996 of 2011 SUDHIR PANDIT Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 2/ 23.03.2011 Heard the parties. The petitioner had earlier moved before this Court for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Pandaul P.S. Case No. 144 of 2009 dated 23.09.2009, registered under Sections 498 (A), 323, 406/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Though the petitioner is the husband of the victim, Ram Pari Devi, daughter of the informant, yet by an order dated 03.05.2010, notices were issued to the victim (O.P. No. 2) and interim protection was granted to the petitioner for three months on fulfillment of certain conditions indicated in the aforesaid order dated 03.05.2010, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 9075 of 2010. It appears that the petitioner has taken full advantage of interim protection granted by the order dated 03.05.2010, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 9075 of 2010, but has not complied with the conditions imposed by that order. 2 For the reasons recorded above, this Court does not find that it is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. The petitioner must surrender within a period of four weeks from today in connection with Pandaul P.S. Case No. 144 of 2009 dated 23.09.2009, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhubani and seek regular bail, if so advised. It goes without saying that if the petitioner enters into a compromise with his wife and both of them appear together in the court below, then learned Magistrate shall consider the prayer for regular bail sympathetically. Let the order be communicated to the court below though FAX at the cost of the petitioner. Anjani/ ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J. )