- (1.) 04/01.05.2012 Heard counsel appearing for the petitioners and counsel appearing for the State.
(2.) PETITIONERS are apprehending their arrest in connection with the case registered under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. Counsel appearing for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioner no.2, who is father in law of the complainant is a practicing lawyer at Gaya. To support his contention, he has annexed the certificate regarding his enrolment issued by Bihar State Bar Council, Patna as Annexure 3 in this application. He has further submitted that there is no specific allegation the petitioners, therefore, they are entitle to get anticipatory bail. It is further contended that accused no.1, who is husband of the complainant, has already filed Matrimonial Suit under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Counsel appearing for the State has submitted that there is specific allegation against the petitioner no.1, who is mother in law of the complainant which has come in the complaint petition even in the statement made by the complainant on her soleman affirmation.
(3.) AS there is no specific allegation against the petitioner no.2, I direct the petitioner no.2 namely Abhay Kumar Mishra @ Devi Lal Mishra to surrender in the trial Court/Court below within a period of one month from the date of this order and if he surrenders, the trial Court/Court below will release him on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/ (Rs. Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at Chaibasa in connection with Complaint Case No. 13 of 2011 with the conditions that one of the bailors will be local resident having immovable property within the jurisdiction of the district concerned and subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Consideration the fact there is specific allegation against the petitioner no.1, I am not inclined to grant her anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner no.1 namely Smt. Indu Mishra stands rejected. 5. However, if the parties compromise, the trial Court/Court below will consider this aspect.;