IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.17256 of 2009 1. MD.ILLIYAS 2. JAINAB KHATOON ….. PETITIOENRS Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR …. OPP. PARTY ----------- 03 14.09.2009 Heard both sides. Petitioners, who are mother-in-law and father-in-law of the victim, have approached this Court seeking anticipatory bail in a case instituted under Sections 304(B), 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code. As per F.I.R., within two years of marriage the victim was done to death in mysterious condition while she was in the matrimonial home. Learned counsel referring to the F.I.R. submits that the allegation of demand of amount as dowry is specifically against the husband. There is no allegation of torture at the hands of the present petitioners. It is next contended that there is some evidence in the case diary that the petitioners were residing separately. On these submissions, prayer for anticipatory bail has made. Learned A.P.P. opposed the prayer. It is contended that the deceased died an unnatural death within two years of marriage. There is allegation of demand of dowry at the hands of 2 sasural people. This Court, on perusal of the materials on record, is of the view that the petitioners may have a good case for regular bail, but so far as anticipatory bail is concerned, this Court on the materials available on record, is not persuaded to extend the aforesaid privilege. Having regard to a different parameters adopted by me, I have passed the present order. This order, therefore, should not prejudice the court below while considering the application for bail, if any made by present petitioners. With this observation, this application is disposed of. P.K. (K.K. Mandal, J.)