IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.2826 of 2010 SITA DEVI, wife of Baijnath Yadav, resident of village Bisharia, P.S. Udakishunganj, District Madhepura Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 23.2.2010 Heard Mr. Gopal Shankar, learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the State. The petitioner, an accused for offence under sections 498A, 323, 504 I.P.C. and section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, has a specific defence that it would be travesty of justice to say that the complainant was the Samdhi or his daughter was married to the son of the petitioner so as to scribe the legendary role of a mother- in-law. In this context Mr. Gopal Shankar learned counsel for the petitioner has invited attention of this Court towards the earlier case filed by the son of the petitioner alleging his being kidnapped and forcibly married with the daughter of the complainant of this case in which the police after investigation had submitted charge sheet and now the trial has also progressed by even framing charges against the complainant and his family member. Learned 2 counsel, therefore, proceeds that the consequent complaint case filed is a counter blast version to give credibility to the alleged story of marriage and put pressure on the petitioner and other family members to accept the daughter of the complainant as wife of her son and her daughter-in-law. Mr. Gopal Shankar in fact would also submit that this alleged marriage in fact even otherwise cannot be held to be legal inasmuch as the son of the petitioner had already been married earlier to another girl. Considering the aforementioned aspects and especially the fact that the marriage of the daughter of the complainant with the son of the petitioner itself is shrouded in mystery and there is also a case filed by the son of the petitioner questioning such marriage, this Court would find that the petitioner, the alleged mother-in-law would prima-facie be entitled for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail, inasmuch as there would be little scope for torturing a daughter-in-law who according to the petitioner was never married to the son 3 of the petitioner on his volition. That being so, if the abovenamed petitioner Sita Devi would surrender before the court of Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Madhepura within a period of four weeks from today, she would be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each in Complaint Case No. 175/2008 to his satisfaction, subject to the conditions as laid down u/s 438(2) Cr.P.C. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/