IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.5535 of 2011 DEEPAK PASWAN @ DEEPAL PRASAD @ DEEPAK PRASAD Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 22.04.2011 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner being the husband is apprehending his arrest in Connection with Ahiyapur P.S. Case No. 429 of 2007 pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur registered under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The marriage was performed in the year 1994. Though, there are accusations of demand of dowry and torture, but, it appears that the victim died on 19.05.2006 due to illness when the present case was filed on 04.10.2007. The F.I.R. reflects that the informant came to know about the death, immediately, the complaint case was filed on 04.10.2007 subsequently, on transfer under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C, police case was registered but it appears that the police found the accusation false 2 and submitted final form but differing with the same, the cognizance has been taken in the matter. It appears that the petitioner filed his anticipatory bail application in the year 2007 before the learned Sessions Judge, which was rejected in the year 2007 when the petitioner kept mum and has filed another anticipatory bail petition in the year 2010 before the learned Sessions Judge. On merits, this is a good case for grant of anticipatory bail, but since, the cognizance was taken in the year 2007 and earlier anticipatory bail application of the petitioner was rejected by the learned Sessions Judge in the year 2007 itself, this Court is not inclined to interfere, however, let the learned court below consider the regular bail application of the petitioner keeping in view that the complaint was lodged after one year of the death and the accusation was found false. With the above observation, this application is, accordingly, disposed off. Amrendra/- (Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.) 3