IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.43305 of 2009 1. RAMESHWAR SINGH @ RAMSHRAY SINGH son of Jang Bahadur Singh 2. Sunita Devi daughter of Ram Nath Singh wife of Rameshwar Singh Both are residents of vill.-Post office-Gosai Chapra, P.S.-Gautam Budh Nagar, District-Siwan-------------------------------------------------------------Petitioners. Versus STATE OF BIHAR . with Cr.Misc. No.44327 of 2009 1. RAM NATH SINGH S/O LATE INDRA SINGH R/O VILL- SUMERPUR, P.O. BISUNPURA, P.S. MAIRWA, DISTT. SIWAN 2. RAMAWATI DEVI W/O RAM NATH SINGH R/O VILL- SUMERPUR, P.O. BISUNPURA, P.S. MAIRWA, DISTT. SIWAN 3. PAPPU SINGH S/O RAM NATH SINGH R/O VILL- SUMERPUR, P.O. BISUNPURA, P.S. MAIRWA, DISTT. SIWAN------------------------------------------------------------------Petitioners. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 3. 11.3.2010 Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw these applications as against petitioner no.1 ( Rameshwar Singh @ Ramshray Singh of Cr. Misc. no.43305 of 2009 and petitioner no.3 (Pappu Singh) of Cr. Misc. no.44327 of 2009 as they have been arrested by police. Permission is accorded. These applications are dismissed as withdrawn as against petitioner no.1 of Cr. Misc. no.43305 of 2009 and petitioner no.3 of Cr. Misc. no.44327 of 2009. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. Marriage is ten years earlier so no question arises about commitment of the offence under section 304 B of the Indian Penal Code though there is allegation of demand of dowry and torture for its non-fulfilment. In course of evidence some witnesses may or may not be produced by the petitioners to save their interest and their family members that her dead body was recovered from railway tracks - 2 - including her 4/5 year old child but having no corroboration from railway records. If there would have been some accident on railway tracks, the same must have been mentioned in railway records. This much of the circumstance only is sufficient for not allowing anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is rejected. However, petitioner, Sunita Devi, if is entitled for a different treatment then her bail can be considered in regular side because of her being married nanad without being prejudiced by this rejection order. Sudip ( Mandhata Singh, J. )