Shankar Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.7356 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -234 Year- 2016 Thana -SAHEBGANJ District- MUZAFFARPUR ======================================================

1. Shankar Mahto, S/o Dhandhari Mahto, resident of village- Pipra Ragho, P.S.- Sahebganj, District- Muzaffarpur.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad, APP Mr. Ajay Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 3/ 24-03-2017 Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and the State.

The Petitioner apprehends his arrest in Sahebganj P.S. Case No.234 of 2016 instituted for the offence under Section(s) 302, 201 Indian Penal Code pending in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, West, Muzaffarpur. It is alleged in the written report that sister of the informant was married with Ramdhari Mahto. Ramdhari Mahto became handicapped about four years back. Thereafter, this petitioner, who was Pattidar of his sister, along with other accused persons, as named in the written report, wanted his sister to execute the sale deed with respect to land of her share for which she was not ready and on account of that she was done to death. Information was given to the informant on 11.10.2016 and

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.7356 of 2017 (3) dt.24-03-2017 2/2 the informant came on 18.10.2016 and enquired from the husband of the deceased, Ramdhari Mahto, who did not give him proper information, and thereafter the case was lodged. Case diary has been received.

The learned APP has submitted that the witnesses in para 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 have all stated that this petitioner assaulted the deceased with iron rod on head and also pushed the iron rod inside the neck and thereafter put her in a urinal and killed her along with other accused persons.

In view of such, this Court does not find it a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail.

Prayer is rejected.

The petitioner may surrender before the Court below and seek regular bail, which shall be considered and disposed of on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order. (Sanjay Priya, J) JA/- U T