IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.23421 of 2008 MD. MUSAHIB & ORS Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- For the petitioner: Mr. Bimal Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Prameshwar Mehta, A.P.P. For the complainant: Jitendra Mishra, Advocate. ----- 3 24.9.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitione, State and the counsel for the complainant. Petitioner Nos. 2 to 6 has already been granted anticipatory bail by order dated 19.6.2008. Application is now limited to consideration for grant of bail to the petitioner No. 1. This is a case under sections 498A of the Indian penal Code and ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Counsel for the petitioner states that the allegations are omnibus and it is stated that the petitioner is ready to keep the girl with full dignity. Counsel for the State submits that there is allegation of torture by the accused persons and petitioner is the husband of the victim girl. Learned counsel for the complainant states that there is no question of keeping the wife with full dignity as the petitioner has already married another girl namely Chunni Khatoon as stated in paragraph 6 of the complaint petition. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. However, if the petitioner surrenders and - 2 - prays for regular bail, his application shall be considered on it own merit without being prejudiced by the present order. .(Dr. Ravi Ranjan) Rahman/