Patna High CourtCR. MISC./32571/2016rejected

Shambhu Chaudhary And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

2016-09-23Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.32571 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -382 Year- 2015 Thana -BALIA District- BEGUSARAI ======================================================

1. Shambhu Chaudhary S/o Ram Bilash Chaudhary

2. Kiran Devi W/o Shambhu Chaudhary

3. Ram Bilash Chaudhary S/o Jaideo Chaudhary All are resident of VillageMasudanpur Diara, P.S.- Balia, Dist.- Begusarai. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vinod Gautam For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Umesh Lal Verma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 23-09-2016 Heard both sides.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Balia P.S. case No. 382 of 2015 under Section 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The informant alleged that he married his younger sister with Rajeev Choudhary, son of Ram Bilash Choudhary, on 27.04.2015 but Rajeev Choudhary and his family members, including the petitioners, began to torture his sister and they were demanding a motor cycle. It is further alleged that the accused persons assaulted his sister and drove her out from the house. The informant took his sister to her Sasural with assurance to fulfill the demand but on 21.12.2015 the informant got information that his

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.32571 of 2016 (4) dt.23-09-2016 2/2 sister was strangulated to death.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are brother-in-law, sister-in-law and father-in-law of the deceased. The deceased was suffering from mental disease and, therefore, she died her natural death but from perusal of the post mortem report, as mentioned in the case diary, it appears that the deceased was strangulated to death. The deceased died within ten months of her marriage in her Sasural and petitioners were also present in the house.

Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) BKS/- U T