IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.15250 of 2011 1. SUDAMA DEVI 2. UMESH SHARMA 3. DHRUVA SHARMA 4. PAWAN SHARMA @ PASWAN SHARMA Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 20.05.2011 Heard learned counsels for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners being the mother-in-law, brothers of the husband and the husband are apprehending their arrest in a complaint case in which cognizance has been taken under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code. The marriage was performed in the year 2001. The victim got injury on 05.05.2003. It appears that on 15.03.2003, the victim statement was recorded by the police in which she stated that she got fire injury while cooking, on the basis of which, the U.D. case was registered on 15.03.2003 itself. The victim died on 22.05.2003, subsequently, on 02.08.2003, the complaint was filed which is subsequently, registered as a police case, in which during the investigation, the accusation was found false and final form was submitted as mistake of 2 fact, subsequently, it appears that on 18.05.2010 on the basis of protest, the cognizance has been taken in the matter. Considering the fact that the accusation was found false during investigation and the statement of the victim was recorded on 15.05.2003 when the occurrence took place on 05.05.2003, let the above named petitioners, be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of 12 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 the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Banka in connection with Complaint Case No. 1527/2009, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. The learned court below will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the petitioners, if the petitioners default for three consecutive occasions. Amrendra/- (Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.)