IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.2662 of 2009 RAM BABU PANDIT Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 8.5.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner prays for anticipatory bail in a case under Sections 341, 323, 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/ 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations made in the original complaint petition on the basis of which the first information report has been lodged are of a general and omnibus character. It is further submitted that the allegations are patently false. The informant, who has deserted the petitioner, was married with one Amrit Lal Pandit who has been mentioned as a witness in the complaint petition filed by her on the basis of which this case was instituted. It is further submitted that the said fact is supported by the certificate dated 25.7.2007 issued by the Mukhia in which it is stated that she had married with one Amrit Lal Pandit on 25.11.2006. It is submitted that the complaint case has been lodged on 20.11.2006, that is just five days earlier to the marriage of the informant and thus this case is patently false and concocted. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that the petitioner ( Ram Babu Pandit) in the event of his arrest or surrender in the Court below within a period of four weeks from today shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 2 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur (West) in connection with Kudhani P.S.Case No.03/2007, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. VPS ( Ramesh Kumar Datta,J.)