IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.22077 of 2008 RAM LAL YADAV @ RAM LALA PRASAD--petitioner Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.Sushila Devi---------------opp.parties ----------- 6. 05.01.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner is the husband apprehending arrest in a complaint case under Section 498A and other provisions of the Penal Code and Sections ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act. Emphasizing pleadings in paragraph 8 of the application that matrimonial harmony stood restored and that the parties were residing as man and wife, it is submitted that a compromise petition to that effect was filed in the court below on 19.2.2008. On 3.5.2008 the court below rejects the prayer for anticipatory bail without even referring to the compromise. The order rejecting the prayer for anticipatory bail is in the teeth of the guidelines laid down by this Court in the judgment reported in 2006(3) PLJR 182 and the judicial adventurism deprecated, notwithstanding the same, in the judgment reported in 2006(4) PLJR 342. 2 Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let petitioner, above named, surrender in the court below within a period of four weeks from today, when he shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rupees ten thousand with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of S.D.J.M., Nawadah, in connection with Complaint case no. 612/06. Let a copy of this order be placed before the Sessions Judge, Nawadah. (Navin Sinha,J.) spal/