Patna High CourtCR. MISC./13840/2024bail rejected

Santosh Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

2024-03-12Mr. Justice Purnendu Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13840 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-101 Year-2023 Thana- DHANGAI District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.

Santosh Paswan S/O Ramashish Paswan 2.

Vanshi Paswan S/O Late Dhaneshwar Paswan 3.

Ramashish Paswan S/O Late Dhaneshwar Paswan All resident of Village- Pararia, P.S- Dhangai, Distt.- Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vijay Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Surendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 12-03-2024 Heard Mr. Vijay Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Surendra Kumar, learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in connection with Dhangai P.S.Case No.101/2023, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302/304(B) and 201 of the Indian Penal Code .

3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the petitioners along with the other accused persons for nonfulfilment of the demand of dowry committed murder of the sister-in-law (Sali) of the informant.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13840 of 2024(2) dt.12-03-2024 2/2 petitioners submitted that petitioner no.1 is elder brother-in-law of the husband of the deceased, petitioner no.2 is cousin uncle of the husband of the deceased and petitioner no.3 is father-inlaw of the deceased and they were nowhere connected with the matrimonial relationship between the deceased and her husband, who is the son of petitioner no.3.

5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners.

6. Having considered the rival submissions made on behalf of the parties, as well as, the allegation made in the FIR, it appears that after committing murder of the deceased, the petitioners along with other co-accused persons had cremated the dead-body of the deceased. As such, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on pre-arrest bail.

7. Accordingly, the bail application of the petitioners is dismissed.

(Purnendu Singh, J) chn/- U