Parmanand Paswan And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.76414 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-254 Year-2018 Thana- BEGUSARAI MUFFASIL DistrictBegusarai ======================================================
1. Parmanand Paswan Son of Rameshwar Paswan
2. Raghuveer Paswan @ Raghuveer Kumar Son of Parmanand Paswan
3. Brinda Devi, Wife of Parmanand Paswan All are resident of Village - Chilmil, P.S. Muffasil, District -Begusarai ... ... Petitioners
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioners :
Mr. Abhay Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party :
APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 07-02-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 498(A), 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code registered in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 254 of 2018.
3. It is submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated merely because they happen to be variously related to the husband of the deceased. It is submitted that the petitioner nos. 1 and 3 were in Delhi and petitioner no. 2 was at Patna at the relevant time and as such he was not present at the place of occurrence at Begusarai. It is submitted that there is no eye-witness to the occurrence and there is no overt act against the petitioners.
4. Learned APP submits that the witnesses in the case diary have supported the prosecution case. There is no material in the case diary to suggest that the petitioners were not at Begusarai on the date of occurrence, as claimed. The post mortem report discloses that there is black ligature mark on the front and right side of neck of the deceased.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.76414 of 2018(3) dt.07-02-2019 2/2
5. Having regard to the nature of accusations and gravity of offence alleged, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. The anticipatory bail petition stands dismissed. BT/Chandran (Vikash Jain, J) U T