Nagendra Paswan And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.18331 of 2017 (5) dt.07-08-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.18331 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -88 Year- 2013 Thana -MAHILA PS District- JEHANABAD ======================================================
1. Nagendra Paswan, S/o late Mallu Paswan
2. Khanchan Devi, W/o Nagendra Paswan
3. Nirpatiya Devi, W/o Late Mallu Paswan, All are residents of Village - Makhdumpur, P.S. + District - Jehanabad.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kunwar Digvijay Singh, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt. Suman Kumari Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 07-08-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Jehanabad Mahila P.S. Case No. 88 of 2013, registered under Sections 304(B) and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, pending in the court Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jehanabad.
The accusation is of killing the daughter of informant by her husband and in-laws within one year of her marriage due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry and also to dispose of her dead body.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.18331 of 2017 (5) dt.07-08-2017 petitioners are brother-in-law (Debar), sister-in-law (Gotni) and mother-in-law of the deceased, daughter of the informant, and they have falsely been implicated in this case without any specific overt act.
Admittedly, petitioners are brother-in-law (Debar), sister-in-law (Gotni) and mother-in-law of the deceased and deceased, daughter of the informant, died at her matrimonial house within one year of her marriage and husband of the deceased is still absconding.
Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation against the petitioners, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, his prayer for grant of anticipatory bail stands rejected. The petitioners are directed to surrender before the trial court within four weeks and pray for regular bail, which would be considered by the trial court in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.
(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Bhardwaj/- U T