Amrita Kumari And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.59281 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -147 Year- 2016 Thana -PANCHRUKHI District- SIWAN ======================================================

1. Amrita Kumari Daughter of Subash Manjhi

2. Munia Devi wife of Late Daroga Manjhi Both residents of Village - Ghorgahia, Police Station - Pachrukhi, District - Siwan. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raghav Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Dr. Indiwar Kumari, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 08-01-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor of the State.

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Pachrukhi P. S. Case No. 147 of 2016 registered for offences punishable under Sections 304 (B)/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The case of the prosecution is that the husband of the deceased, namely, Nagendra Chaudhary and others have committed the murder of the daughter of the informant on account of non fulfillment of demand of dowry and thereafter disposed of her dead body.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation in the F.I.R. has been made only against the husband

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.59281 of 2017 (3) dt.08-01-2018 2/2 and mother-in-law of the deceased whereas the petitioners are the sister-in-law and grand mother-in-law of the deceased. It is further submitted that the husband of the deceased is in custody and coaccused person Subhash Manjhi ( father-in-law of the deceased) has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 15.03.2017, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 8462 of 2017. Considering the fact and circumstances of the case, more particularly, the fact that the husband is in custody and father-in-law has already been granted regular bail by this Court, I find that the petitioners' case are also entitled to be extended the privilege of anticipatory bail in the event of arrest/surrender of the petitioners within six weeks from today, in connection with Pachrukhi P. S. Case No.

147 of 2016 on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-(Rs. Ten thousand)each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate- VI, Siwan, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) Sudha/- U T