IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.13619 of 2011 KAILASH PRASAD @ MUNNA PRASAD Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 24.05.2011 Vide order dated 11.05.2011, it appears that the facts of other case has wrongly been typed by the steno. Let it be read as “ the petitioner being the husband is apprehending his arrest in a complaint case in which cognizance has been taken under Section 147, 461, 323 and 384 of the Indian Penal Code. The complainant is the second wife of the petitioner. It is submitted by learned counsel for the complainant that the complainant is still ready to reside with the petitioner as wife but she is apprehensive about the ill behaviour of the petitioner. The petitioner undertakes to keep the complainant as wife with full dignity and honour and also undertakes not to violate the undertaking given by this Court. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is ready to give 2 maintenance of Rs. 1500/-. Learned counsel for the complainant chooses the option of residing with the petitioner and accepts that she will not receive any maintenance amount. Let the petitioner and the complainant appear before the learned court below on 30th of May, 2011 when the petitioner will take back the complainant and her children to her matrimonial house to keep her as wife with full dignity and honour. Considering the aforesaid fact, let the petitioner above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of 12 weeks from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail for six months, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saran at Chapra in connection with Tr. No. 2558/10 arising out of Complaint Case No. 2705/09, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. The provisional anticipatory bail of the 3 petitioner will be confirmed by the learned court below on substantial restoration of the matrimonial harmony or if the complainant deliberately refuses to reside with the petitioner”. The order dated 11.05.2011 stands corrected to the extent as indicated above. Let the order be transmitted to the learned court below through fax at the cost of the petitioner. Amrendra/- (Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.)