IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.42674 of 2008 1. RAJESHWAR UPADHYAY, SON OF LATE RAM ADHAR UPADHYAY 2. RAM AYODHYA UPADHYAY, SON OF MARKANDEY UPADHYAY 3. KASHI NATH UPADHYAY, SON OF MATHURA UPADHYAY. 4. SHESH NATH UPADHYAY, SON OF RAJESHWAR UPADHYAY. 5. AWADHESH MISHRA, SON OF JAGDISH MISHRA. 6. BADAMI DEVI, WIFE OF RAJESHWAR UPADHYAY. 7. SAROJA DEVI, WIFE OF RAM AYODHYA UPADHYAY. 8. PUNAM DEVI, WIFE OF SHESH NATH UPADHYAY ALL RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE BARAULI, P.S. SONHAN, DISTRICT KAIMUR---PETITIONERS. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. DANGAL PANDEY, SON OF LATE RAM BACHAN PANDEY, R/V BEHERI, P.S. BHABUA, DISTRICT KAIMUR AT BHABUA---OPP. PARTIES. WITH Cr.Misc. No.348 of 2009 SANDIP KUMAR UPADHYAY, SON OF RAJESHWAR UPADHYAY, R/V BARAHULI, P.S. SONHA, DISTRICT KAIMUR AT BHABUA----PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. DANGAL PANDEY, SON OF LATE RAM BACHAN PANDEY, R/V BEHERI, P.S. BHABUA, DISTRICT KAIMUR ---OPP. PARTIES. ----------- 08. 20.07.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. Petitioners of Cr. Misc. No. 42674 of 2008 are the close relatives of the petitioner in Cr. Misc. No. 348 of 2009. They are apprehending their arrest in connection with a case registered for the offence under Sections 498A and 406 of the Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. They are named in the complaint. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the marriage was solemnized with the another daughter of the complainant Dangal Pandey and in support of such fact the photograph at Annexure-2 is relied upon. It is further submitted that petitioners have no objection to continue the matrimonial relationship with the daughter of the complainant with whom Sandip Kumar Upadhyay got himself - 2 - photographed. The photograph is contained in Annexure-2. During the pendency of the complaint, the daughter whose photograph is Annexure-2 has been married else where and petitioner Sandip Kumar Upadhyay is being asked to continue matrimonial relationship with another daughter of the complainant, who has been produced in Court and this Court having seen the daughter of Complainant Dangal Pandey, who has been produced in Court and the one whose photograph is Annexure-2 is of the view that the daughter of Dangal Pandey, who has been produced in Court is not the same person whose photograph is Annexure-2, accordingly the above named petitioners are directed to appear in the court below within one week from today and be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5000/- (Five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of S.D.J.M., Kaimur at Bhabua in connection with Complaint Case No. 535C of 2008. Rajesh/ (V.N.Sinha,J.)