IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.41425 of 2010 MAJISTER MAHTO, son of Sri Sarvan Mahto Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2/- 21.12.2010 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State. 2. Petitioner is an accused for offences punishable under section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is the husband of the alleged victim and in fact, the alleged victim who is daughter of the complainant, never wanted to live with the petitioner and she herself went to her maike with her father. Informatory Petition No. 144 of 2009 dated 10.02.2009, filed by father of the petitioner before the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Danapur clearly showed that the alleged victim herself did not want to leave with her husband and her father took her to his place. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for State vehemently opposes the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that in the complaint it has been stated by the complainant who happens to be the mother of 2 the alleged victim that she apprehended that the victim had been killed by the petitioner, hence he submits that this is a serious matter. 5. It is quite apparent that the F.I.R. was lodged by the complainant under section 498(A) of the I.P.C. and no other provision of law has been mentioned, and hence, the only allegation against the petitioner which is being investigated is with respect to Section 498 (A) of the I.P.C.. It is also apparent that the petitioner has remained in custody since 29.05.2010. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances aforementioned, petitioner named above is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Danapur(Patna) in connection with Complaint Case No. 321 ( C) of 2009. Ashwini/- (S. N. Hussain, J. )