IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.34154 of 2010 MAHESH SAH SON OF LATE VISHESHWAR SAH, VILLAGE NARHAN BAZAR, P.S. BIDHUTIPUR, DISTRICT- SAMASTIPUR Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 03.11.2010 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the State. The offence alleged is under sections 304B, 120B and 201 of the Penal Code. Petitioner’s earlier attempt for anticipatory bail was rejected by order dated 24th March, 2009 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 1551 of 2009. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that on perusal of the complaint itself it would appear that the complaint in question was filed for ulterior purposes since the complainant had got a grudge on account of marriage of her daughter with this petitioner since it was made to understand her that this petitioner was dealing in the business of gold whereas he was simply a worker in a jewelry shop. Learned counsel further submits that on account of fact being disclosed the daughter of the complainant took divorce with the petitioner and left the matrimonial house, however the petitioner on account of disappearance of the daughter of the complainant is apprehending his arrest Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State on - 2 - perusal of the case diary is not in position to refute the above submissions. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saharsa, in connection with Saharsa Sadar P.S. Case No. 386 of 2007 subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Manish/- ( Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J.)