Indrajeet Paswan @ Jainnu Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.43971 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -130 Year- 2017 Thana -GHOSI District- JEHANABAD ====================================================== Indrajeet Paswan @ Jainnu Paswan S/o Arjun Paswan @ Arun Paswan, R/o Vill.- Anantpur, P.S.- Ghosi, District- Jehanabad. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bhola Kumar, Adv. For the Informant: : Mr. Ajay Kumar No.1, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Harendra Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 20-09-2018 Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in Ghosi (Okari) P.S. Case No. 130/2017, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304(B), 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Informant is father of deceased who in his written complaint alleged that his daughter was married to the petitioner Indrajeet Paswan in the year 2011 and from said wedlock three children were born. On account of non-fulfillment of demand of dowry his daughter and his grand-son was set on fire by the petitioner and family members.

It has been submitted that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Allegation is of general and omnibus nature and no specific allegation has been made against anyone. It was accidental fire in which deceased and his son died. Petitioner

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.43971 of 2018 (3) dt.20-09-2018 2/2 is in custody since 04.01.2018 and he has no criminal antecedent. Considering the facts aforesaid, the petitioner abovenamed, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sub-Judge I, Jehanabad in connection with Ghosi (Okari) P.S. Case No. 130/2017, subject to the conditions:

(1.) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned.

(2.) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will be sufficient to cancel his bail bonds.

(3.) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

(S. Kumar, J) Vinita/- U T