Shashi Kapoor Jha v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35392 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-280 Year-2024 Thana- RUNISAIDPUR District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Shashi Kapoor Jha S/o Farendra Jha Resident of Village- Gadha, PS- Garha, District- Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Dwij Raj For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Rajendra Nath Jha, APP Mr. Brij Bihari Tiwary, Adv.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 24-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Runnisaidpur P.S. Case No. 280/2024, registered for offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 238, 3(5) of the B.N.S.
3. The prosecution case, in short, as per written application of the informant namely, Bachneshwar Jha is that the accused Shashi Kapoor Jha (petitioner) and others had forcibly kept his married daughter namely Arati Jha on 6th May, 2018. On 01.08.2024, the informant received an information through mobile that on 31.07.2024 the accused persons killed his daughter by means of knife, sword and also cremated the dead-body of the deceased.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35392 of 2025(2) dt.24-07-2025 2/2
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that informant is not eye-witness to the occurrence and only on suspicion, petitioner has been made accused in this case. Petitioner is a married person and leading a peaceful life with his wife and two children, but since petitioner and informant are of same village, he has been dragged in this case.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for informant submits that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. with specific allegation that this petitioner kept the deceased forcibly and killed her. During investigation, it has come that the deceased used to tell the name of this petitioner on mobile phone, as one of the person, who would kill her. Besides this, petitioner has got one criminal antecedent.
6. Considering the nature of accusation and criminal antecedent, the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay U T