IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.15347 of 2011 PAPPU KUMAR @ SHAILENDRA KUMAR S/O BRAHMDEO MAHTO, R/O VILLAGE-HIRANDIA, P.S. ROSERA, DISTRICT SAMASTIPUR. --PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. MADHU BHARATI D/O PRAMOD KR. W/O PAPPU KR. @ SHAILENDRA KR., R/O VILLAGE-HIRANDIA, P.S. ROSERA, DISTRICT-SAMASTIPUR AT PRESENT VILLAGE HARIPUR, P.S. ROSERA, DIST. SAMASTIPUR. --OPP.PARTIES 2 04.05.2011 Heard. This is an application seeking quashing of the condition imposed to pay a sum of Rs.3,000/- per month as maintenance to opposite party no.2 while granting privilege of anticipatory bail in ABP no.745 of 2010 by learned Sessions Judgem Samastipur in connection with Rosera P.S. Case no. 130 of 2010 under Sections 494, 498 of the Indian Penal Code and ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act. It is submitted that before the learned court below there was no submission / claim for maintenance but it has erroneously been mentioned and such condition was imposed. After some arguments, learned counsel for the 2 petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this application with a liberty to request the court below by filing an application seeking modification in the order. The court below shall pass appropriate order taking into consideration the submission and factual aspects. With the above liberty, this application is disposed of. AAhmad ( Akhilesh Chandra, J.)