IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.30081 of 2008 DINESH JHA, Son of late Kamal Narain Jha @ Nunu Jha, resident of village-Ramauli, P.S. Bahera, District- Darbhanga. Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 24.10.2008 The case is under Section 304B/120B of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner, the father-in-law of the deceased. The petitioner and others are named in the F.I.R. with the specific allegation that the petitioner and others had demanded Rs.1 lakh as dowry and in case of non-payment of dowry money, the petitioner himself had threatened that in case of non payment of the money, the deceased’s Maika people would repent for the loss of the deceased. It is also alleged that deceased was forcibly administered poison, started vomiting blood and died. Earlier anticipatory bail petition had also been filed in this case under Cr. Misc. No. 49605 of 2006 but after some arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw it and accordingly vide order dated 8.12.2006 the application had been dismissed as withdrawn. The instant application is second attempt for the purpose of anticipatory bail. Today the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in this case the I.O. had submitted final form but the learned C.J.M. has taken cognizance of the offence. Mr. S.R. Haque, the learned A.P.P. submits that there is direct allegation on the petitioner and it is also submitted that on consideration of the materials against the petitioner in the case diary - 2 - that the learned C.J.M. has also taken cognizance of the offence and the petitioner had to be put on trial for the offence. In such view of the matter, I do not feel inclined to reconsider the prayer for bail. Accordingly, it is rejected. (C.M. Prasad, J.) Ravi/-