IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.33206 of 2010 RENU DEVI @ RANI DEVI & ORS Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 02/ 2.11.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned P.P. for the State. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner points out that petitioner no.2, namely, Pankaj Yadav died in accident at Delhi. So his prayer for anticipatory bail has become infructous. Accordingly, his prayer for anticipatory bail stands dismissed as being infructous. So far as petitioner no.1, namely, Renu Devi @ Rani Devi and petitioner no.3, namely, Rinku Devi are concerned, admittedly, they are married Nanad and Gutani of the deceased respectively. It appears from perusal of the FIR and the impugned order that marriage of the deceased took place in the year 2001 and her death took place in the year 2007. Though in post mort examination some poisonous substance was found in viscera of the deceased but admittedly, the husband of the deceased is lying in judicial custody and it appears to me that there is difference between the deceased and her husband. In the aforesaid circumstances, this anticipatory bail is allowed and it is ordered that the petitioners( Renu Devi @ Rani Devi and Rinku Devi) in the event of arrest/ surrender within 30 days from the date of communication of the order be released on bail in connection with Amarpur P.S. Case no. 233 of 2007 registered under section 304B/34 IPC on furnishing bail bond of Rs 10,000/- each with 2 two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banka subject to condition as laid down under section 438(2) of the Cr. P.C. shahid (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J))