IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.42236 of 2010 1. SIDHESHWAR MAHTO. 2. ARUN PRASAD @ ARUN KUMAR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 02 26.03.2011 Heard counsel for the petitioners and the State. Petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 1045 of 2004 registered for offence under Sections 498A/304B/201 of the Indian Penal Code. In the complaint case, name of the petitioners have also been included in the column of the accused without alleging any specific overt act against them. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the daughter of the complainant was living at Hyderabad with her husband and subsequently she solemnized another marriage with a person, belonging to Rajasthan. It has also been submitted that petitioners did not have any knowledge regarding institution of the complaint case, till the date they received notice that cognizance has been taken against them in the complaint case by order 2 dated 13.08.2009. Considering this fact prayer for anticipatory bail on behalf of petitioners Sidheshwar Mahto and Arun Prasad @ Arun Kumar are allowed. Petitioners above named in the event of their arrest/surrender within four weeks from today in the Court below, shall be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nawadah in connection with Complaint Case No. 1045 of 2004, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Safik ( Mridula Mishra, J.)