IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.43922 of 2008 1.SHEO KUMARO DEVI @ Mosst. Butani Devi, wife of late Laxman Pandit 2.Surendra Pandit @ Surendra Kumar, son of late Laxman Pandit, both residents of village Bihta, P.S. Bihta, Dist. Patna------------------------------petitioners Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. Rita Devi, wife of Surendra Pandit, resident of village & P.S. Bihta, Dist. Patna, at present residing at village Pachayna Bazar, P.S. Koilwar,Dist.Bhojpur-O.P. ----------- 2. 21.11.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for opposite party no.2, complainant, who has appeared suo motu. The petitioners are mother-in-law and husband of the complainant apprehending arrest under Section 498A of the Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The impugned order noticed that their application for anticipatory bail was rejected by this Court earlier. It is well settled that a fresh application for anticipatory bail can be entertained if there be subsequent fresh developments. The Apex Court has already held that in 498A matters the court should adopt a different approach and even exercise their powers appropriately under Section 2 482 Cr.P.C. even though the offence is not compoundable. In the present case, it is the orders of the court which disrupt matrimonial harmony. The duty of the court is to ensure that matrimonial harmony is revived. The fresh application for anticipatory bail filed on the subsequent developments that the matter had been compromised and the husband and wife were living together, which counsel for the opposite party no.2 reiterates, the court below nonetheless has mechanically, without any application of mind rejected the prayer for anticipatory bail indulging in judicial adventurism already deprecated by this Court in its order reported in 2006(4) PLJR 343 (Ajay Kr.Singh vs. State of Bihar). Let the petitioners surrender in the court below within a period of four weeks from today, when they shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of rupees ten thousand each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, 3 Bhojpur at Ara, in connection with Complaint case no. 1429© of 2004, Trial No. 2075/06. Let a copy of this order be placed before the Sessions Judge, Bhojpur at Ara. (Navin Sinha,J.) spal/