Madan Rai And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.17597 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -83 Year- 2015 Thana -GANGABRIDGE DistrictVAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ======================================================
1. Madan Rai son of Late Parmeshwar Rai
2. Shakuntala Devi wife of Madan Rai
3. Anjit Rai son of Madan Rai All are residents of village - Terasiya West from Paya No. 8, P.S. - Ganga Bridge, District - Vaishali.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Mishra For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. U.S.P.Singh(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 20-10-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
The petitioners being father-in-law, mother-in-law and Dewar apprehend their arrest in connection with Ganga Bridge P.S. Case No. 83/2015, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304(B) and 201 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3⁄4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Diary in this case was called for earlier, which has, since been received.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is no material against the petitioners and that the main allegation for
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.17597 of 2016 (7) dt.20-10-2016 P2/2 demand of dowry is against the husband.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State after perusal of the case dairy, however, submits that there is sufficient material in the case diary to indicate the complicity of the present petitioners as they together used to demand dowry and as per independent witnesses, they have susceptibly removed the dead body informing the kith and kin of the victim lady. In view of such fact facts and circumstances, and there being the cogent material in the case diary, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to this petitioner. It is accordingly rejected. (Anjana Mishra, J) Saif/- U T