AB 934/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B D AGARWAL Both the aforesaid applications are being disposed of by this common ord er, since the applications are arising out of the same case. Heard Dr Y K Phukan, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Sri BS Sinha, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam and Sheik h Nur Mohammad, objecting the bail prayer. Both the applications have been filed under Section 438 of the Code of C riminal Procedure, by the husband and his parents, namely, Md Sirajuddin, Md Abd ul Sahid and Smti Anu Begum, seeking pre-arrest bail, apprehending their arrest in connection with Paltanbazar P.S. Case No. 217 of 2011, under Sections 498 (A) /326 of the Indian Penal Code. The FIR has been lodged by the brother of the victim woman alleging that his sister was not given proper status of a wife in the matrimonial house and h is sister was also not allowed to go to her parents’ home. It has also been alle ged in the FIR that the informant’s sister was physically assaulted for not fulf illing the demand of dowry. In addition to these allegations, it has also been s tated in the FIR that on 29.03.2011, the informant’s sister was being taken in a car with an intention to kill her and as such, the victim jumped from the car a t the Ulubari Flyover Junction. The law regarding anticipatory bail has been recently decided by the Hon ’ble Supreme Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre -Vs- State of Mah arashtra; (2011) 1 SCC 694. In the said case, their Lordships have held that if it is found that the accused persons are likely to co-operate the investigation and if there is less possibility of jumping bail and also considering the allega tions etc., the accused persons are entitled to anticipatory bail. In the present case, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has fairly admitted that so far the Investigating Officer has not recorded the statement o f any independent witness to corroborate the allegation of demand of dowry or ab out physical assault. Besides this, there is neither any medical report about an y injury inflicted upon the victim woman nor there is any evidence that the info rmant’s sister had jumped from the vehicle at the road junction. If the allegati on made in the FIR that the victim woman had jumped from the vehicle, in that si tuation, the woman would have sustained some injuries. However, there is no such medical report. Having regard to all the aspects of the case, I am of the view that cust odial interrogation of the petitioners may not be required. Hence, the bail prayers are accepted. Accordingly, the Investigating Officer is directed to release these peti tioners, on bail on their furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- each, with one s urety each, of the like amount to his satisfaction, in the event of their arrest in connection with the aforesaid PS Case. However, the petitioners are directed to appear before the Investigating Officer within a period of 1 (one) week from today and they shall co-operate in the investigation.