Sewak Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32122 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-342 Year-2019 Thana- KOTWA District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.
SEWAK SINGH SON OF LATE DEO SINGH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - MADUWAHA, P.S. - KOTWA, DISTRICT - EAST CHAMPARAN 2.
ASHA DEVI WIFE OF SEWAK SINGH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - MADUWAHA, P.S. - KOTWA, DISTRICT - EAST CHAMPARAN 3.
RAGINI KUMARI DAUGHTER OF SEWAK SINGH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - MADUWAHA, P.S. - KOTWA, DISTRICT - EAST CHAMPARAN 4.
SANGITA DEVI DAUGHTER OF SEWAK SINGH, WIFE OF VINAY SINGH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - MADUWAHA, P.S. - KOTWA, DISTRICT - EAST CHAMPARAN 5.
MUNNA KUMAR SON OF SEWAK SINGH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - MADUWAHA, P.S. - KOTWA, DISTRICT - EAST CHAMPARAN ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Rajesh Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Surendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 20-07-2024 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioners are apprehending arrest in connection with Kotwa P.S. Case No. 342 of 2019 instituted under Sections 304B, 201, 120(B) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code lodged on 26.11.2019 by the informant, Deepak Singh.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that his sister was married to Brij Singh, son of petitioner no.1 in the year 2016 but was tortured for dowry and in the year 2019 got information about her death. Upon reaching, was found that even dead body has been disposed of as would reflect from the complaint, dates back to the year 2019 the alleged death took
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32122 of 2024(3) dt.20-07-2024 2/2 place. Accordingly, the FIR.
4. The petitioners herein who are family members and the allegation are there against them, approached this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 35510 of 2020 which came to be rejected by a coordinate bench on 29.7.2021 i.e. exactly three years ago. Instead, approaching the court concerned, the petitioners chose to play hide and seek. In between, the husband who was in judicial custody, his trial went on and as per learned counsel for the petitioners, he has subsequently been acquitted.
5. This cannot be a ground for defying the law existing in the country. The fact remains that the death took place in 2019, the petitioners preferred anticipatory bail application in the year 2020 which came to be rejected in the year 2021, they chose to evade arrest, the husband faced the trial and as per the submission, is now acquitted. The petitioners should also take the same route.
6. The second anticipatory bail application stands rejected.
(Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U T