IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.42183 of 2010 1. SADIK KHAN 2. JAMIL KHAN 3. KAMIL KHAN 4. AURENGJEB KHAN 5. KAILU KHAN @ KAMLU KHAN Versus STATE OF BIHAR . ----------- 02/ 26.03.2011 Heard counsel for the petitioners, the State and the complainant. Petitioner no. 1 is the father-in-law of the complainant, petitioner nos. 2, 3and 4 are brother-in- law and petitioner no. 5 is not the family member of the husband of the complainant. Counsel for the petitioners submits that in the complaint petition itself the complainant has stated that after her marriage for sometime she lived at her sasural and on 2.8.2009 she went to live with her husband at Delhi. She could not maintain good relationship with her husband and thereafter she came back to her father’s place. It has further been submitted that considering this statement, these petitioners had no occasion to either make any demand for dowry or to torture the complainant. All allegations are false and fabricated. 2 Considering these facts, prayer for anticipatory bail on behalf of all the five petitioners above named is allowed. They are directed to be released on bail, in case of their appearance before the court below within four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of S.D.J.M., Saharsa in connection with Complaint Case No. 1701C of 2009, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. DKS/ (Mridula Mishra, J.)