IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.5244 of 2009 1. YAMUNA PASWAN 2. RAMPATI PASWAN @ RAMPATI PASWAN 3. DEOKALI DEVI Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 02/ 15.05.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. This petition for anticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioners, who are accused for offences punishable under sections 323, 398(A) and 504 of the Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no.1 is the husband of the complainant and petitioners no.2 and 3 are her father-in-law and mother-in-law, respectively, but the entire allegation is absolutely false and frivolous as petitioner no.1 has been and in future also is ready to keep his wife with proper care, affection and security. He further submits that the aforesaid case has been lodged due to confusion and on the instigation of the persons, who are inimical to the petitioners. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case as well as the arguments of the parties, this petition is allowed. In case of surrender/arrest within fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order in the court below, let all the three petitioners, namely, (i) Yamuna Paswan, (ii) Rampati Paswan alias Rampati Paswan and (iii) Deokali Devi be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000.00 (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub- 2 Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sherghati at Gaya in connection with Complaint Case No. 2 of 2006. MPS/ ( S. N. Hussain, J. )