Jitendra Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8436 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-35 Year-2011 Thana- RANIYATALAB District- Patna ====================================================== Jitendra Thakur Son Of Akhlesh Thakur R/O Village- Sadabah, P.S.- Dulhin Bazar, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bishwa Bijay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anil Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 18-04-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Rani Talab P.S. Case No. 35 of 2011 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 306 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code later on converted into Sections 302, 201 and 34 of the IPC pending in the Court of learned A.C.J.M., Danapur, Patna. Allegation against the petitioner, who is husband of the informant's deceased sister, is that he and other accused persons killed informant's sister and disposed of her dead body in order to destroy the evidence.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has been falsely implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8436 of 2023(2) dt.18-04-2023 2/2 He submits that the petitioner has not tortured deceased in any manner and entire allegation made in F.I.R. is false. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of the bail application.

Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that there is specific overt act against the petitioner. Hence, he does not deserve privilege of anticipatory bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of case and the nature of the offence and petitioner is husband of the deceased, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) anand/- U T