IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.8100 of 2010 GITA PANDEY Versus STATE OF BIHAR With Cr.Misc. No. 9783 of 2010 Lal Krishna Pandey s/o Sri Devendar Nath pandey R/o village Magarhan, P.S. Chunnar, Dist. Mirzapur (U.P) ……Petitoiners. Versus STATE OF BIHAR. ----------- 2 13.4.2010 Heard Mr Hare Krishna Kumar , learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in both the cases, Mr Gauri Shankar, learned A.P.P. for the State and Mr. Rashid Izhar, learned counsel appearing for the informant. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with complaint case no. 1650 of 2008 in which cognizance has been taken under sections 498A, 406/34 of the Indian Penal Code as also under section ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act. It is submitted that petitioner Gita Pandey is the mother-in-law of the complainant and petitioner Lal Krishna Pandey is the husband of the complainant. It is also submitted that even according to the prosecution case there is no specific allegation of demand of dowry and torture against the petitioner Gita Pandey. The allegation of demand of dowry and torture is general and omnibus against all the accused persons. It is highlighted that though there is specific allegation of demand of dowry and torture against the petitioner Lal Krishna Pandey, but allegation appears to be highly improbable and unbelievable and therefore, petitioners are entitled to have the privilege of anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the State as also learned counsel appearing for the informant have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail made on - 2 - behalf of the petitioners tooth and nail. Be that as it may , in the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into consideration that petitioner Gita Pandey is a lady , being the mother-in-law of the complainant, and there being no specific allegation of demand of dowry and torture against her, in the vent of her arrest or surrender in the court below within a period of four weeks from today, she shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of C.J.M, Gaya in the above noted case, subject to the conditions laid down under section 438(2) Cr.P.C. However, so far petitioner Lal Krishna Pandey is concerned, he is the husband of the complainant and there is specific allegation of demand of dowry and torture against him. In that view of the matter, this court is not inclined to accede to the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail. It is accordingly dismissed. Petitioner Lal Bihari Pandey must surrender in the court below within a period of four weeks from today and, if so advised, seek regular bail. If such a petition is filed, then the same may be disposed of on its own merit without being prejudiced by the present order. (Birendra Prasad Verma, J) M.Rahman