- (1.) 04 /16.05.2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the O.P. No.2.
(2.) THE petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with the case registered under Sections 498A/307/323/504/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of the D.P. Act. But, the learned court below took cognizance only under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner and there is only general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner. It is also submitted that another co-accused (petitioner's father-in-law) has already been granted anticipatory bail by the court below. Learned counsel appearing for the O.P. No.2 has submitted that as the petitioner and O.P. No.2 were agreed to settle their dispute, the matter was earlier referred to the Conciliator, JHALSA, Ranchi, but the petitioner did not agree to settle the matter finally neither he was ready to keep the O.P. No.2 with him. Ultimately, the said conciliation has failed. It is also submitted that there is specific allegation against the petitioner, who is the husband of the O.P. No.2. It is further submitted that the petitioner always used to threaten the Complainant-O.P. No.2 that he will marry another girl, if his demand of Rs.50,000/- will not be fulfilled. Considering the submissions made by both the parties and considering the fact that there is specific allegation against the petitioner, who is the husband of the O.P. No.2, I am not inclined to release the petitioner, above named, on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.;