Arvind Prasad v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45468 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-98 Year-2020 Thana- PALI District- Jehanabad ====================================================== ARVIND PRASAD Son of Basant Prasad Resident of Village- Latanpati, P.S.- Pali, District- Jehanabad.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 46010 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-98 Year-2020 Thana- PALI District- Jehanabad ====================================================== 1.
LALMANI DEVI Wife of Basant Prasad Resident of Village - Latanpati, Police Station - Pali, District - Jahanabad.
2.
Sobha Devi Wife of Arvind Prasad Resident of Village - Latanpati, Police Station - Pali, District - Jahanabad.
3.
Amrita Kumari D/O Arvind Prasad Resident of Village - Latanpati, Police Station - Pali, District - Jahanabad.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 45468 of 2021) For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Pramod Ban Bihari Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Md. Fahimuddin (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 46010 of 2021) For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Pramod Ban Bihari Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Md. Fahimuddin ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 18-04-2022 The learned counsel for the petitioners is directed to remove all the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter within one month.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45468 of 2021(2) dt.18-04-2022 2/3 learned APP for the State.
The petitioners apprehend their arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 341, 323, 326, 307 and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code and later on Section 302 of the IPC was added, registered in connection with Pali P.S.Case No. 98 of 2020.
As per allegation, the petitioners along with other accused persons, after sprinkling kerosene oil on the informant Juhi Kumari, set her on fire who sustaining injury died during the course of treatment.
The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioner Arvind Prasad is Devar (brother-in-law) of the deceased, petitioner Lalmani Devi is mother-in-law, petitioner Sobha Devi is Gotni and the petitioner Amrita Kumari is unmarried daughter of the petitioner Lalmani Devi. They have falsely been implicated in this case.
The case has been registered on the fardbayan of the deceased, who lost her life during the course of her treatment. She has named the petitioners and specifically stated that they set her on fire after sprinkling kerosene oil. The reason behind the occurrence is that there was some quarrel between the petitioner Shobha Devi and the deceased.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45468 of 2021(2) dt.18-04-2022 3/3 Considering the above facts and circumstances, the petitioners do not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail. Their prayer for anticipatory bail is hereby rejected. Office shall ensure that all defects are removed by the petitioners within the stipulated time as provided hereinabove, failing which the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.
(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) HR/- U T