ORDER : 1. The petitioners are accused of commission of offences punishable under Sections 498A and 304(B) read with Section 34 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 in Cr. No. 232 of 2016 registered by the Chickballapura Town Police Station Chikkaballapura. 2. Heard Sri. Nataraj R, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri. B. Vishweshwaraiah, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State. 3. Case of the prosecution is that the complainant’s daughter Mamatha was married with accused No. 1 (son of 1st and 2nd petitioners) about four years prior to the date of incident. She committed suicide on 14.12.2016 by hanging being unable to bear the ill-treatment meted out by her husband and his family members. Complainant has alleged that all the accused were demanding for dowry and harassing the victim. 4. Sri Nataraj R. learned counsel for the petitioners adverting to the contents of the complaint submits that the victim was staying in a separate house with her husband since six months prior to the date of occurrence of the incident. Therefore, the petitioners who are father, mother and brother of accused No. 1 husband had no clue with regard to the reason if any for the victim to commit suicide. He further submits that petitioners No. 1 and 2 are senior citizens, aged 61 and 63 years respectively. Accused No. 1 husband has already been arrested. With these submissions, he prays for allowing this petition. 5. Per contra, Sri. B. Vishweshwaraiah, learned High Court Government Pleader opposing the petition submits that the offences alleged are punishable under Section 304(B) of IPC and the death of victim has occurred within 7 years of marriage giving rise to presumption in law that the death is occurred due to dowry harassment. He further submits that it is fairly well-settled that the Court while considering the bail application must deal with iron hands so far as the cases concerning with dowry harassment. With these submissions, he prays for dismissal of the petition. 6. A careful perusal of the complaint discloses that the deceased and her husband were staying in a separate house for about six months prior to the date of fateful incident. With these submissions, he prays for dismissal of the petition. 6. A careful perusal of the complaint discloses that the deceased and her husband were staying in a separate house for about six months prior to the date of fateful incident. Though there is an allegation leveled in the complaint by victim’s mother, in the complaint that victim’s husband, parents-in-law and brother-in-law were demanding dowry, the complaint is bereft of details with regard to quantum of demand and other details. Though the death has occurred within 7 years of marriage giving rise to a presumption that the death could be due to dowry harassment, the circumstance that the victim was staying in a separate house with her husband only and the husband having been arrested by the police coupled with the fact that petitioners No. 1 and 2 are senior citizens, aged 61 and 63 years respectively, in my view, their prayer of petitioners for grant of anticipatory bail merits consideration. Further, on the ground of parity, the 3rd accused shall also be entitled for consideration of his case. 7. In the premise, the petitioners deserve to be enlarged on bail, subject to the following conditions: (i) Petitioners shall surrender before the investigating officer of the jurisdictional police station on or before 15.02.2017 and in such an event, petitioners shall be released on bail upon their executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- each with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer; (ii) They shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer for conducting investigation and appear before investigating officer as and when called for; (iii) They shall not hold out threats to the prosecution witnesses or lure them in any manner; (iv) They shall not involve in any criminal activities. (v) If the petitioners violate any one of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to seek for cancellation of bail. Petition is allowed.