IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.10386 of 2011 1. Laxmi Narain Singh, son of Late Raman Singh. 2. Ahilya Devi, wife of Laxmi Narayan Singh and 3. Sangita Kumari, wife of Shivam Pandey. Petitioner nos. 1 and 2 are residents of Village- Ratanpur Dihi, P.S. Saraiya, District-Muzaffarpur and Petitioner no. 3 resident of Village- Manikpur, P.S. Baruraj, District- Muzaffarpur………………………………Petitioners. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR……………………………………………….Opposite Party. ----------- 2. 22.04.2011. Heard the learned counsels for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307, 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and Section ¾ of the D. P. Act which was subsequently converted into under Sections 304(B), 498(A),120(B) and 34 of the I.P.C. The accusation is that the marriage was performed 1 ½ years prior to the occurrence and the victim died due to burnt injury. The specific accusation in the F.I.R. is against the husband and father-in- law of demand of dowry. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the victim died due to burnt injury and she was given medical help immediately the incident. The informant has retracted from his initial version and filed a petition to that effect 2 before the leaned court below. Learned counsel for the State Mr. Dashrath Mehta submits that the impugned order reflects that the victim stated to the informant levelling the accusation against all the family members. Considering the aforesaid submissions, let the petitioner nos. 2 and 3, above named, be released on bail in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of twelve weeks from today in connection with Saraiya P.S. Case No. 73 of 2010 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M., West, Muzaffarpur, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. So far as petitioner no.1 being father-in-law having specific accusation is concerned, let the petitioner no.1 surrender and pray for regular bail before the learned court below within a period of four weeks from today when the learned court below will pass appropriate order preferably on the 3 same day with regard to regular bail application of petitioner no.1 keeping in view that the informant has retracted from his initial version and admittedly petitioner no.1 was not present at the place of occurrence at the relevant time. With this observation, this application is disposed off with regard to petitioner no.1. U. K. ( Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)