Patna High CourtCR. MISC./34793/2020dismissed

Vikram Sah Gond @ Vikram Sah v. The State Of Bihar

2021-02-25Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34793 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-103 Year-2020 Thana- RAGHUNATHPUR District- Siwan ====================================================== 1.

VIKRAM SAH GOND @ VIKRAM SAH Son of Late Naresh Sah Resident of Village - Laghusa, P.S.- Raghunathpur, District - Siwan. 2.

Nirmala Devi Wife of Vikram Sah Gond @ Vikram Sah Resident of Village - Laghusa, P.S.- Raghunathpur, District - Siwan. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Prabhakar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Aditya Narain Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 25-02-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State. Learned counsel for the petitioners has filed an undertaking to remove all defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter as and when required. It is accordingly directed that all defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter be removed within one month hereof.

2. The petitioners are in custody since 07.07.2020 in connection with Raghunathpur P.S. Case No. 103 of 2020 for the alleged offences under Sections 304B/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. It is submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated merely because they happen to the father-in-law and mother-in-law respectively, of the deceased. It is submitted that the accusations are general and omnibus in nature. The petitioners were living separately from the deceased and her husband and as such they had no concern with their day-to-day matters. The petitioners claim clean antecedents.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34793 of 2020(3) dt.25-02-2021 2/2

4. Learned APP appears and submits on the basis of case diary that there is no material bearing to indicate that the petitioners were living separately.

5. Having regard to the nature of accusations and gravity of offence alleged, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of bail to the petitioners. The petition stands dismissed.

6. Office shall follow-up to ensure that all defects are removed and compliance with the notices of this Court are made by the petitioners within the stipulated time provided in para 1 hereinabove, failing which the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

(Vikash Jain, J) Chandran/- U T