IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.11140 of 2011 1. Deomuna Devi, wife of Jaigobind Pandey. 2. Jaigobind Pandey, son of late Lakhan Pandey, Both residents of village- Haudih, Police Station- Nasariganj, District-Rohtas………………………………..……..…..Petitioners. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR………………………………………..………Opposite Party. ----------- 2. 27.04.2011. Heard the learned counsels for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in complaint case in which cognizance has been takenunder Sections 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioner no. 2 has been arrested. Hence, his anticipatory bail application has become infructuous. The accusation against the petitioner no.1 is to have executed sale deed on 19.12.2007 with regard to land of the complainant when the complainant on the same day executed a sale deed in favour of other person. The thrust of accusation is against petitioner no. 1 who is eighty years old. Considering the nature of accusation 2 and the fact that petitioner no. 1 is lady, let the petitioner no.1, 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 complaint case no. 631 of 2009 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M. Rohtas, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. U. K. ( Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)