Jitar Singh @ Jitendra Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3337 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-88 Year-2020 Thana- PANAPUR District- Saran ====================================================== 1.

JITAR SINGH @ JITENDRA SINGH, Son of Late Bishwanath Singh, Resident of Village - Satjora Gayee Tola, P.S.- Panapur, Distt.- Saran 2.

Geeta Devi, W/o Jitar Singh @ Jitendra Singh, Resident of Village - Satjora Gayee Tola, P.S.- Panapur, Distt.- Saran 3.

Khushi Kumari, D/o Jitar Singh @ Jitendra Singh, Resident of Village - Satjora Gayee Tola, P.S.- Panapur, Distt.- Saran ... Petitioners

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioners :

Mr. Satyapal Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party :

Mr. Kumar Veerendra Narain, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA ORAL ORDER 07-02-2022 Heard the parties through video conferencing. So far as petitioner no. 3, Khushi Kumari, is concerned, since she was granted interim bail, in the opinion of this Court her case can be distinguished to others and she is therefore granted benefit of anticipatory bail in connection with Panapur P.S. Case No. 88 of 2020 instituted for the offences under Sections 304(B)m 120(B) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. She shall be released on bail subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

The allegation against petitioner no. 1, Jitar Singh @ Jitendra Singh, and petitioner no. 2, Geeta Devi, is under Section 304(B) of the Indian Penal Code.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3337 of 2021(4) dt.07-02-2022 2/2 Taking into consideration the nature of allegation and that a young girl of 22 years has died at her in-laws place, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to petitioner no. 1, Jitar Singh @ Jitendra Singh, and petitioner no. 2, Geeta Devi. Accordingly, the prayer for bail on behalf of petitioners 1 and 2 is rejected.

(Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J) Shamshad/- U T