Anshu Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.54793 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-168 Year-2024 Thana- PATLIPUTRA District- Patna ====================================================== 1.

ANSHU KUMARI DAUGHTER OF UMASHANKAR JHA Resident of Mohalla - Garha, Bahilwara, P.O. - Garha, P.S. - Garha, District- Sitamarhi. At present Resident of Mohalla - Indrapuri, Keshari Nagar, P.S. - Patliputra, District - Patna.

2.

RUDRA KUMAR JHA SON OF UMASHANKAR JHA Resident of Mohalla - Indrapuri, Keshari Nagar, P.S. - Patliputra, District - Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Mani Bhushan Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Choubey Jawahar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 07-08-2024 1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 306 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and petitioner No. 1 is a woman and the informant alleges that he received an information from Patliputra Police Station that Mrinal has consumed poison and is admitted in Ruban Hospital, accordingly the informant along with his family members reached Ruban Hospital. It is next alleged that Mrinal was his

2/4 grand-son who was staying in Patna and was working in a private sector for the last two years and he came to know that victim was admitted in the Hospital by petitioner No. 2. It is further alleged that victim had disclosed to his brother that he was in love with Petitioner No. 1 and was under mental tension for few days, thus informant alleges that Mrinal consumed poison on account of tension inflicted by Petitioner No. 1, the victim died during the course of treatment.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant based on suspicion. It is also submitted that Petitioner No. 2 is own brother of Petitioner No. 1 and Petitioner No. 1 came in contact with the deceased as he introduced himself as a C.B.I officer and was forcing the Petitioner No. 1 to marry him secretly to which the Petitioner No. 1 did not agree, further the Petitioner No. 1 came to know that deceased is an unemployed youth and falsely disclosed that he is a CBI officer, thus petitioner No. 1 blocked his number, on which the deceased started calling her from other numbers, accordingly an information about harassment being meted out to Petitioner No. 1 was given to the Patliputra Police Station where deceased was summoned and he sought an apology from the

3/4 police officials and the petitioners and assured that he will not disturb the Petitioner No. 1 in future. It is further submitted that the deceased had come to the police station after consuming poison which was noticed by the police officials, who asked him whether he was feeling unwell, on which the victim disclosed that he had consumed poison, accordingly the Petitioner No. 2 rushed the deceased to Ruban Hospital where he was admitted, and arranged an amount of Rs. 20,000/- for his treatment. It is next submitted that petitioners was also involved in Sarmera PS Case No. 121 of 2022, which was instituted under the Arms Act and other sections (Annexure-4). Learned counsel submits that informant based on suspicion alleges that on account of tension being inflicted by the Petitioner No.

1, the victim committed suicide by consuming poison. It is also submitted that no girl would marry a person who has criminal antecedents. It is futher submitted that initially the Petitioner No. 1 was not aware about the misdeeds committed by the deceased as he introduced himself as a CBI officer as would manifest from Annexure-3, which is a fake CBI ID of the deceased sent to the Petitioner No.

1. It is next submitted that when Petitioner No. 1 and her family members came to know that deceased is an unemployed youth and was involved in a criminal case as such the Petitioner No. 1

4/4 blocked his number and that perhaps may have triggered the deceased to commit suicide. It is next submitted that petitioners will not abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation. 5.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

6.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Patliputra P.S. Case No. 168 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) SUMIT/- U T