IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.8035 of 2010 1. SABITA DEVI 2. PHULWATIYA DEVI 3. NARESH YADAV ---------------- PETITIONERS Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 9.4.2010 Heard learned counsel for the parties. I agree with the submission of learned counsel for the informant that from the very beginning the Police official appears favouring accused persons otherwise allegation having every ingredient of section 304B IPC F.I.R. is not lodged under that section rather for the offence under section 302 IPC. There is allegation about torture due to non-fulfilment of demand soon before the death within seven years in matrimonial house. Death is unnatural one, informed by the deceased to her family members only two days earlier to her finding dead is corroborated by several witnesses from parental side. Later another story appeared in the case about the objection lodged by in-laws to have a talk 2 with Ramdeo casting some suspicion on deceased’s character but in face of allegation that cannot be believed for allowing petitioners on anticipatory bail. Hence, prayer for anticipatory bail on behalf of petitioners is rejected. AI ( Mandhata Singh, J.)