IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.37949 of 2009 1.KUSUM DEVI, wife of Shri Ram Ishwar Rai, resident of village Majhauli, P.S. Baniyapur, District Saran. 2.Radhika Devi, wife of Shri Parma Rai @ parmanand Rai, resident of village Majhauli, p.S. baniyapur, District Saran, presently residing at E.547, Street No.10, West Binod nagar, Delhi-110092. Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 26/2/2010 Heard counsel for the petitioners and counsel for the State. The two petitioners seek anticipatory bail in connection with an offence under sections 304 B, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and their first and foremost plea is that they are only Gotni of the deceased and the prosecution has not made husband as an accused and in fact lodged a vexatious prosecution against them. Counsel further submits that the marriage admittedly has taken place ten years earlier and the deceased lady with her husband, Devar of the two petitioners, was living at Delhi and in fact on the fateful date while the deceased lady was living with them in their house was seriously ill and was taken to a doctor, but her life could not be saved despite best efforts made by the petitioners and other family members who had also taken her to the specialized centre for treatment. Counsel further submits that co-accused Rameshwar Rai has also been released on bail therefore these two ladies would be entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. In the opinion of this Court, husband being not made 2 accused would not be fatal for the prosecution for offence u/s 304B I.P.C., inasmuch as, if husband was not alleged to be responsible for the offence alleged nor even present at the time of death of the deceased which as per notes of investigation recorded in the case diary had taken place on account of indiscriminate assault on her person due to provocation of the petitioner no. 1 on account of throwing of sleepers on her by the deceased. All these matters could still pale into insignificance but there would be no explanation as to why, if the deceased had died a natural death, she was cremated without giving information to her family members at her naihar which by itself may lead to a presumption that the petitioners and her family members having killed the deceased had made an attempt to true version of her death. That being so, the petitioners despite being ladies, facing the main allegation would not be entitled for grant of anticipatory bail and therefore if they surrender and seek regular bail, their such prayer without being prejudiced by this order will be decided on its own merits and by also taking into account that the husband of petitioner no.1 has been granted regular bail. With the aforementioned observations this application is disposed of. Abhay Kumar ( Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)