IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.39902 of 2010 MOHAMMAD SAHID SIDDIQUE . Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR . ----------- 02/ 08-Nov-2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. In the complaint petition filed under Section 498A and other Sections of the IPC and Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act petitioner is named as husband of the complainant, the victim lady. Petitioner denies the factum of marriage. It will not be possible for this Court to act on such a defence at this stage. The parents of the complainant appear to have supported the factum of marriage. Considering the special responsibility upon the petitioner as husband, his case stands on a different footing than other co-accused in this case. In that view of the matter, prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. However, This order shall not prejudice his defence, and his prayer for regular bail shall be considered on its own merit. In case, petitioner succeeds in resolving his dispute with the complainant and appears in the court 2 below within ten weeks, in that event, he shall be enlarged on bail on the date of surrender itself in connection with Complaint Case No. 1714/2009 pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhubani. perwez ( Shiva Kirti Singh, J.)