IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.22430 of 2009 MAHADEO YADAV Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 27.08.2009 Heard both sides. The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted under Sections 304(B), 20/34 of Indian Penal Code. Petitioner is father-in-law. Learned counsel for the petitioner is right in his submission that allegations are primarily against the husband. It is submitted that all other co-accuseds of the case have been released on bail on different dates by this court. It is next contended that the petitioner is aged about 80 years. This court finds from the record that the anticipatory bail of the petitioner was rejected by this court sometimes in the year 2001. Petitioner thereafter continued to evade arrest and submit to the jurisdiction of the court. Ultimately processes under Sections 82 and 83 were issued and executed. Charge-sheet was also submitted showing him absconder. Looking to that aspect of the matter, this court for the present is not inclined to admit him to bail. His prayer for bail stands rejected. This court, however, cannot be oblivious of the submissions that other co-accuseds having allegations including the husband are on bail. Overall facts emerging from the records persuades the court to grant him liberty to renew his prayer after 2 five months if the trial of the case is not taken up and concluded from the date of receipt/communication of a copy of this order. pkj ( Kishore K. Mandal, J. )