IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.2818 of 2010 JAMALUDDIN AHMAD @ MD.JAMALUDDIN AHMAD Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 22.4.2010 Heard Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Jagdish Prasad learned counsel appearing for the complainant as also learned A.P.P. for the State. In compliance of order dated 6.4.2010 the complainant and the petitioner are physically present in the court and they have been duly identified by their respective counsels. In compliance of the aforesaid order dated 6.4.2010 a compromise petition in the form of an affidavit has been filed today which has been signed by the petitioner, complainant and their respective counsels. Let it be kept on record. The compromise petition shall form part of this order. According to the terms of compromise the petitioner and the complainant have decided to restore their matrimonial relationship and have decided to live like legally wedded husband and wife. It has been also agreed that from this court itself the petitioner and the complainant shall proceed together to the paternal house of the petitioner at Siwan. In the aforesaid background let the above named petitioner in the event of his arrest or surrender in the court below within a period of four weeks from today, 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 Shri Md. Geyasuddin, J.M. Ist class, BETTIAH, West Champaran in connection with complaint case no. 376-C of 2008, giving rise to trial No. - 2 - 2284 of 2009, subject to the conditions laid don under section 438(2) Cr.P.C and subject to further conditions that petitioner and O.P. no.2 shall fully comply with the terms and condition of compromise arrived at. Non- compliance of the terms and condition of compromise shall be construed as misuse of privilege of bail and consequences shall follow. ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J. ) M.Rahman