Biraichi Devi @ Biranchi Devi And ORS v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.20818 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -967 Year- 2014 Thana -NAWADAH COMPLAINT CASE DistrictNAWADA ======================================================
1. Biraichi Devi @ Biranchi Devi wife of Late Lalo Rajbanshi (Mother in law).
2. Anil Rajbanhshi, son of Late Lalo Rajbanshi (Bhaisur).
3. Sarswati Devi, wife of Anil Rajbanshi (Gotani).
4. Gulshan Rajbanshi @ Gulshan Kumar son of Late Lalo Rajbanshi (dewar).
5. Chhatar Rajbanshi, son of Late Bhola Rajbanshi (Cousin father in law). All resident of village- Patrang, P.S. Akbarpur, District- Nawadah. .... .... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Guriya Devi, wife of Bilendra Rajbanshi, resident of village Patrang, P.S. Akbarpur, District- Nawadah. at present Guriya Devi, D/o Nageshwar Rajbanshi, Resident of village- Jamalichak (Jagatpur) P.S.- Akabarpur, Dist- Nawadah.
.... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Deo Raj For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER ........................
18-06-2015 Heard Sri Krishna Deo Raj, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Addl. Public Prosecutor. Five petitioners, who are in laws of the complainant, apprehending their arrest in connection with Complaint Case no.967 of 2014, registered for the offence under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, have prayed for grant of anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20818 of 2015 (2) dt.18-06-2015 2/2 petitioner no.1 is mother-in-law, petitioner no.2 is elder brother of husband of the complainant, petitioner no.3 is wife of petitioner no.2, petitioner no.4 is younger brother of husband of the complainant and petitioner no.5 is cousin father-in-law of the complainant. He submits that the husband of the complainant had filed a petition for anticipatory bail, which has been rejected by the court below. It was argued that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case.
Keeping in view the fact that the petitioners are in-laws members of the complainant, the Court considers that it is a fit case for extending the privilege of anticipatory bail. Let the aforesaid five petitioners, namely, (i) Biraichi Devi @ Biranchi Devi (ii) Anil Rajbanshi (iii) Sarswati Devi (iv) Gulshan Rajbanshi @ Gulshan Kumar and (v) Chhatar Rajbanshi, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of one month from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-( ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned SDJM, Nawada in connection with Complaint Case no.967 of 2014, subject to conditions as laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
NKS/- (Rakesh Kumar, J) U T