IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.45515 of 2009 1.CHANDRA MUKHI DEVI 2.Hari Prasad Rai,Both are resident of village Marvadi, Marwari Mohalla, Near Shivam Tokkies, P.S. Jay Nagar Dist. Madhubani. Petitioners. Versus STATE OF BIHAR O.P. ----------- With Cr. Misc. No. 14213 of 2010 1.Arun Kumar Roy @ Arun Kumar ……………Petitioners Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR. O.P. -------------- For the petitioners : Mr. Raj Kishore Prasad, Advocate. For the informant : Mr. Rajendra Nath Kanth, Advocate. ------------ 6 30.4.2010 Heard the parties. In a criminal prosecution under section 498 A of the Indian penal Code and 3 / 4 of the Dowry prohibition Act Arun Kumar Roy @ Arun Kumar (petitioner in Cr. Misc. No. 14213 of 2010) is the husband of the informant Jyoti Kumari and Chandramukhi Devi and Hari Prasad Rai (petitioners in Cr. Misc. No. 45515 of 2009) are mother-in-law and father-in- law of the informant Jyoti Kumari. In the FIR vide annexure-1 there is allegation of demand of dowry and torture against the petitioners and further informant was driven out from her matrimonial home by these petitioners. In compliance of order dated 19.4.2010 the husband and father- in-law of the informant are physically present in court. However, mother-in- law is absent on the ground of some illness. Despite opportunities given to the parties for arriving at a compromise either for restoration of matrimonial relationship or for one time settlement of entire dispute between them, no compromise petition has - 2 - been filed till date, though the matter is being heard for last three days. From perusal of the impugned order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Madhubani, it appears that petitioners did not permit the learned Sessions Judge to call for the case diary and peruse the materials available on record, rather on their insistence the application filed on their behalf was disposed of without looking into the case diary. In the aforesaid background the petitions filed on behalf of the petitioners for grant of anticipatory bail are rejected by this court with a liberty to the petitioners to file a fresh petition before the learned Sessions Judge, if so advised. If fresh petition for grant of anticipatory bail is filed, the learned Sessions Judge, Madhubani, may call for the case diary and may look into the materials available on record and only then may dispose of the petition filed on their behalf. However, before passing such order, the parties may be given opportunities to arrive at some compromise either for restoration of matrimonial relationship or for one time settlement of entire dispute. If the petitioners do not to file fresh petition before the learned Sessions Judge, Madhubani, then in that case they must surrender within a period of four weeks from today in the court below in connection with Jai Nagar P.S. Case No. 96 of 2009 and, if so advised, seek regular bail. If such a petition is filed, then the same may be disposed of on its own merit without being prejudiced by the present order. ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J. ) M.Rahman