Santosh Tanti @ Santosh Kumar And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.35381 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -162 Year- 2016 Thana -BIHARSHARIF District- NALANDA (BIHARSHARIFF) ======================================================

1. Santosh Tanti @ Santosh Kumar

2. Gurhiya Kumari @ Bhawan Kumari @ Guria W/o Santosh Tanti @ Santosh Kumar Both are R/o Village/Mohalla-Amber Sristhal, P.S.-Bihar, DistrictNalanda. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur For the State : Dr. Mrityunjaya Ku. Guatam For the Informant : Satya Panjan Sinha Seema Kumari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 19-09-2016 Heard.

The petitioners are accused of Bihar P.S. Case No. 162 of 2016 for the offence under Sections 323, 342, 504, 506, 302, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and have approached this Court for grant of anticipatory bail.

The mother of the deceased lodged the case that her daughter was married only about one and half years before with Anandi Kumar and she was living at matrimonial home. On receiving a call from her daughter on the relevant date, she went to meet her sasural. When she reached there, she saw all the accused(s) persons including the petitioners sitting outside the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.35381 of 2016 (2) dt.19-09-2016 2/2 room on the upper floor of the house. She entered into the room, to find the dead body of her daughter. When she tried to report the matter, she was threatened and assaulted by the accused(s) persons and thereafter the body was brought down and was concealed in the nearby corn field. However, the police arrived immediately and the body was recovered. The allegation is that she was done to death by her in-laws and husband when she was at the matrimonial home.

The counsel for the informant has placed the FIR as well as the relevant part/portion of the order of the learned Sessions Judge in order to submit that the petitioners are accused of 304(B) of the Indian Penal Code. The witnesses in course of investigation have supported the case.

Considering the seriousness of the allegation and the other materials reflected from the record, I do not find it a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail.

The prayer is rejected.

(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) rohit/- U T