IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.35429 of 2009 SHYAM SUNDER MAHTO Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 4 15.4.2010 Heard the parties. In compliance of order dated 30.3.2010 petitioner as also O.P. no.2 are physically present in the court and they have been duly identified by their respective counsels. A compromise petition duly signed by the petitioner as also O.P. no.2 and their respective lawyers has also been filed in the court today. Let it be kept on record. According to the terms of aforesaid compromise petition, they have decided to restore their matrimonial relationship and to live together like legally wedded wife and husband. They have also undertaken to comply other conditions which have been put in the aforesaid compromise petition. In the aforesaid back ground and in view of the compromise which has been arrived at between the petitioner and O.P. no.2 , let the above named petitioner in the event of his arrest or surrender in the court below within a period of four weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of C.J.M, Lakhisarai in connection with complaint case no. 450 C/ 2006, subject to the conditions laid down under section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and subject to further condition that if the petitioner fails to comply the terms of compromise referred to above, it will be construed to be misuse of privilege anticipatory bail and consequences shall follow. It is also expected that the O.P. no.2 will lead happy conjugal life - 2 - with the petitioner. (Birendra Prasad Verma, J) M.Rahman