Ankita Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8226 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-78 Year-2021 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali ====================================================== 1.

Ankita kumari d/o Parvesh Paswan Resident Of Village- Harpur Jado, Police Station- Mahua, District- Vaishali.

2.

Prakash Kumar Son of Parvesh Paswan Resident of Village- Harpur Jado, Police Station- Mahua, District- Vaishali.

3.

Naresh Paswan Son of Late Awadh Paswan Resident of Village- Harpur Jado, Police Station- Mahua, District- Vaishali. 4.

Parvesh Paswan Son of Late Awadh Paswan Resident of Village- Harpur Jado, Police Station- Mahua, District- Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ranjit Kumar Thakur For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Raj Ballabh Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 02-11-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State. The instant application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioners apprehending their arrest in connection with Mahua P.S. Case no. 78 of 2021 instituted for the offence under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Prosecution case in nutshell is that at about 01.00 PM the brother of the informant had called him and when he reached there, he found that his son died. It is further alleged that his son fled away with petitioner no.1 namely Ankita

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8226 of 2022(4) dt.02-11-2022 2/3 Kumari and got married to her. It is further alleged that the petitioners had threatened to kill him, his son and his family. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners has submitted that petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence. They have falsely been implicated in this case. It is admitted fact that the petitioner Ankita performed marriage with son of informant but at the time of occurrence petitioner Ankita and deceased lived separately. There is no specific material of committing murder of the deceased against these petitioners. According to Postmortem Report, Doctor opined that cause of death is due to strangulation. They have got no criminal antecedent.

Learned APP appearing for the state and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer of anticipatory bail and submitted that there is strong suspicion against the petitioners behind this murder of deceased. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The petitioners are directed to surrender in the Court below within a period of four weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrender in connection with Mahua P.S. Case no. 78 of 2021,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8226 of 2022(4) dt.02-11-2022 3/3 they will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Vaishali at Hazipur subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) amandeep/- U