Laljee Bind v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35185 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-61 Year-2020 Thana- AUANGARI District- Nalanda ====================================================== 1.
LALJEE BIND SON OF LATE MASTER BIND RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- TELIYAMAI, PS- AUNGARI, DISTT- NALANDA 2.
ANITA DEVI WIFE OF LALJEE BIND RESIDENT OF VILLAGETELIYAMAI, PS- AUNGARI, DISTT- NALANDA ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sameer Sawarn, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, Addl. Public Prosecutor ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 21-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.
2. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 302 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, in brief is that on 18.07.2020 informant received information on phone that his son-in-law was killed by these petitioners. As per information, they went to the house of his son-in-law where he saw that his son-in-law namely Manu Bind was lying dead on chowki. There was injury upon the hand, leg and chest. On enquiry he came to know that these petitioners along with one
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35185 of 2023(2) dt.21-07-2023 2/2 Lalita Kumari has exhibited his son-in-law by brick, stone, lathi and knife resulting murder of his son-in-law.
4. It is submitted that petitioner No. 1 is brother and petitioner No. 2 is babhi of the deceased. These petitioners have been made accused in this case due to land dispute between the parties. Petitioners are poor and illiterate labour who is working outside the state for livelihood. There is witness of the occurrence. Petitioners claim clean antecedent.
5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that petitioner are named in FIR and there is direct allegation of assault is against these petitioners. From perusal of case diary it is evident that witnesses have supported the prosecution case.
6. Considering the nature and gravity of allegation, prayer for pre-arrest bail of the petitioners is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Kaushik/- U T