Order Both the Anticipatory Bail Applications are taken up together for final disposal by a common order passed in A.B.A. No.1851 of 2007. 2. The petitioners Bindu Devi @ Bindu Singh and Bishwanath Singh of A.B.A. No. 1851 of 2007 as well as Brij Bhushan Singh @ Brij Singh of A.B.A. No. 1986 of 2007 apprehend their arrest in Ratu P.S. Case No. 200 of 2007 corresponding to G.R. No. 3166 of 2007 pending in the Court of C.J.M., Ranchi for the alleged offence under Sections 498A, 323,504/34 I.P.C. as also under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 3. The informant Vinita Singh by a detailed written report presented before the Officer-in-Charge of Ratu Police Station has narrated her miseries at her matrimonial home at the hands of the petitioners who are none other than the husband, mother-in-law and father-in-law. She had alleged the complicity of her married sister-in-laws and against the husband of one of the sister-in-laws but they have been admitted to anticipatory bail by this Court in A.B.A. No 1859 of 2007 on 19.9.2007. 4. Much attempt was made by this Court to resolve the disputes between the parties but of no avail and finally it was heard on merit. 5. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 6. The main allegation of the informant O.P. No.2 was that her husband Brij Bhushan Singh @ Brij Singh was an impotent, who was earlier serving in the army during their marriage but after sometime he deserted the army and procured certificate of his mental abnormality to show the marshal in case of his prosecution. A sum of Rs.2.5 lakhs was demanded by the husband and the other petitioners so as to start new business and when the informant expressed the inability of her parents she was subjected to mental torture and physical harassment in various manner. 7. Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioners categorically submitted that the entire allegations were false. As a matter of fact, the informant had herself deserted her husband and other in-laws when she was asked to behave properly in her matrimonial home. 7. Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioners categorically submitted that the entire allegations were false. As a matter of fact, the informant had herself deserted her husband and other in-laws when she was asked to behave properly in her matrimonial home. The mother-in-law Bindu Devi @ Bindu Singh is a lady aged about 65-70 years old suffering from various ailments who tried to keep the informant with all dignity and honour but the informant was always hostile to her and refused to integrate with the petitioners and other relatives in spite of love and affection showered upon her. 8. Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned Counsel pointed out that since the informant was living separately by deserting her husband, the petitioner-husband filed a Matrimonial Title Suit No. 171 of 2006 for the restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 but with the intervention of the well-wishers an agreement was executed and the petitioner-husband withdrew that suit on 21.6.2007. As a matter of fact, the in-formant had been living separately since 27.7.2005 so the question of torture, cruelty or demand of dowry did not arise. She was quarrelsome who refused to establish physical relationship with her husband by discharging matrimonial obligations and finding no option, the husband petitioner filed another Matrimonial Title Suit No. 154 of 2007 under Section 13(1)(1-a)(1-b) of Hindu Marriage Act on 16.1.2007 and only thereafter the present criminal case was brought about by the informant against all the members of the family of her husband. 9. Mr. Laljee Sahay, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the informant strongly opposed the anticipatory bail of the petitioners on the ground of their rude behaviour, misconduct and they being the inventor of miseries to the informant who was just married in the year 2002 and had come to her matrimonial home with vision and dream but all belied which could be evident from her tale of miseries which she has narrated in long 4 pages. 10. 10. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the old age of the mother-in-law of the informant Bindu Devi @ Bindu Singh, in the event of her arrest or surrender within 15 days of this order, she is directed to be released on executing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sure, ties of like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in connection with Ratu P.S. Case No. 200 of 2007 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 3166 of 2007 subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 11. But in view of the direct allegation against the husband Brij Bhushan Singh @ Brij Singh and his father Bishwanath Singh being the head of the family who failed to bring the situation under control, I am not inclined and hence their prayer for anticipatory bail stands rejected with the direction to surrender in the court below within 15 days of this order otherwise the Court shall be at liberty to take appropriate steps. 12. Accordingly both the Anticipatory Bail Applications are disposed of.