IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.581 of 2010 Vimal Devi, wife of Pattar, P.S.- Saharghat, District- Madhubani, resident of Village-Pattar, P.S. Saharghat, District-Madhubani …………………………Petitioner. Versus The State of Bihar ………………………..Opposite Party. ----------- 3. 08. 04. 2010. Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Jagdish Prasad Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant as also Mr D. Mehta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Saharghat P.S. Case No. 66/09 dated 09. 09. 2009, registered under Sections 302 and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that she happens to be mother-in-law of the deceased, but there is no legal material to connect her with offence in question. It is further submitted that, though deceased was married with the son of the petitioner and it was an inter caste marriage between the two, but the entire family had accepted the marriage and they were living happily and a son was born from the said wedlock. Learned counsel for the State as also the informant have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and have stated that the petitioner is the mother-in-law of the deceased and she is alleged to have played active role for commission of crime in question. Therefore, she is not entitled to have the privilege of anticipatory bail. 2 In the aforesaid background, prayer for anticipatory bail made on behalf of the petitioner is rejected. The petitioner must surrender in the court below within a period of four weeks from today and if so advised, seek regular. If such a prayer is made, then the same may be disposed of on its own merit without being prejudiced by the present order and also by taking into consideration that other co-accused persons including the husband have been granted bail. m.p. ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)