Pawan Kumar Sinha @ Pawan Kumar Verma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.6747 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -299 Year- 2016 Thana -KHAZANIHAT District- PURNIA ====================================================== Pawan Kumar Sinha @ Pawan Kumar Verma, son of Sri Vijay Kumar, resident of Village- Hanuman Nagar, P.S.- Laheri (Murarpur), DistrictNalanda. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. B.K.Sinha, Sr.Advocate with Ms. Madhuri Lata, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Smt. Pushpa Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 16-03-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with K. Hat P.S. Case No. 299 of 2016 lodged for the offences punishable under Section 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is brother-in-law of the deceased and there is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner and investigation is still going on though charge-sheet has been submitted against the husband of the deceased and learned Magistrate has taken cognizance against the petitioner also. It has also been submitted that there is nothing against the petitioner as the petitioner is Branch Manager of Central Bank and is living separately from the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.6747 of 2017 (3) dt.16-03-2017 2/2 husband of the deceased.

Heard learned APP and learned counsel for the informant also, who have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail stating that from perusal of the post mortem report it appears that deceased was cut by sharp cutting weapon and, as such, this is a case of brutal murder and the petitioner being brother of husband of the deceased has conspired and, as such, petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail.

Having heard both sides and in view of the fact that investigation is still going on against the petitioner and cognizance has been taken against the petitioner on the basis of materials available on record, as such, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Petitioner should surrender and pray for regular bail, which shall be considered on its own merit, without being prejudiced by this order.

Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) spal/- U