R.R. Prasad, J. - (1.) Heard learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. appearing for the State.
(2.) The petitioners, who are accused for offence under sections 420 of the Indian Penal Code and also under section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, pray for anticipatory bail expressing apprehension of their arrest in connection with C.P. Case No. 519 of 2006.
(3.) Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that it is the case of the complainant that the marriage was fixed in between the petitioner No. 1 and the daughter of the complainant and even ceremony of engagement took place wherein Rs. 95,000/- was taken by the petitioners but in spite of that the petitioner No. 1, subsequently refused to marry the daughter of the complainant, but the entire allegations are false and as a matter of fact, there was no exchange of money and the fact is that the petitioner No. 1 being holder of a degree of M.B.A., when came to know that the daughter of the complainant is only matriculate, he did not agree to marry her and went against the wishes of his parents and then even the daughter of the complainant, subsequently, got married to another boy. Learned Counsel further submits that without going into the merit of the case, these petitioners would be ready to deposit Rs. 95,000/- which has been alleged to have taken by these petitioners, but that deposit would be without prejudice to the case of the parties and also subject to the result of the case.;