Upendra Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.10891 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -192 Year- 2016 Thana -PARSA District- SARAN ====================================================== Upendra Mahto Son of Bikrama Mahto Resident of Village- Bishunpura, Police Station- Parsa, District- Saran (Chapra). .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Brij Kishor Mishra, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Smt. Sahin Begam, APP. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 18-05-2017 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Parsa P. S. Case No. 192 of 2016 registered for the offences under Sections 498A, 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The informant stated that his daughter was married to the petitioner in the year 2007, but the petitioner and others began demanding different articles. The petitioner was assaulting his wife and the informant got the information on 31.10.2016 and went to the house of the petitioner. The informant found the dead body of his daughter brought by an ambulance. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is, of course, the husband of the deceased, but the marriage was solemnized in the year 2007. The deceased committed suicide. During the course of investigation, it has

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.10891 of 2017 (3) dt.18-05-2017 2/2 come that the deceased had quarreled with the petitioner for going to her parent's house and that is why she committed suicide. Even Supervisory Authority found that it is a case of suicide, but it appears that the petitioner is the husband and the witnesses disclosed that the petitioner quarreled with his wife. The informant and other witnesses stated that the petitioner used to assault his wife.

Considering the facts aforesaid and the fact that the petitioner is the husband, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Mishra/- U T