APARESH KUMAR SINGH, J. - (1.) THE learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State.
(2.) PETITIONERS are father -in -law, mother -in -law, nanad of the informant and brothers of the husband of the informant, who are apprehending their arrest in connection with Chainpur P.S. Case No. 165 of 2013 corresponding to G.R. No. 2162 of 2013 for the offence registered under Sections 498A,379,406,504 of the Indian Penal Code and ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act . According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the marriage of the informant took place with Irshad Alam, son of the petitioner no.1 and 2 on 30.11.2010. The informant was found to be suffering from skin disorder for which treatment was also undertaken by the husband and his family members i.e. present petitioners. It is submitted that there was also a panchayati in the presence of Sarpanch of the village on 26.8.2013(Annexure -3) in which the factum of the disease of the informant was also noticed. The parties arrived at a amiable settlement and decided to live happily. Thereafter, the informant lodged a complaint on 8.10.2013 which has led to the institution of the instant F.I.R with concocted allegation against all these petitioners. It is further submitted that the husband of the petitioner has in fact instituted a Matrimonial Case no. 896 of 2013 against his wife -informant, which is pending in the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Patna. Petitioner no.1 is in active service as a Police Constable, petitioner no.2 and 3 are ladies. In such circumstances, it is prayed that petitioners deserve to be granted anticipatory bail.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the state however opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.;