Jayro Sahani v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48799 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-206 Year-2022 Thana- PAKRIDAYAL District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.
Jayro Sahani Son Of Late Anandi Sahani R/O- Village- Rajepur Nawada Teliyapur, P.S.- Pakaridayal, Distt.- East Champaran 2.
Parwati Devi @ Ghoghari Wife Of Jayro Sahani R/O- Village- Rajepur Nawada Teliyapur, P.S.- Pakaridayal, Distt.- East Champaran 3.
Anil Shani Son Of Jayro Sahan R/O- Village- Rajepur Nawada Teliyapur, P.S.- Pakaridayal, Distt.- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Arun Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 18-12-2024 Heard Ld. counsel for the petitioners and Ld. APP for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Pakaridayal P.S. Case No. 206 of 2022 dated 20.08.2022, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304(B), 201, 324, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the allegation, the deceased has been subjected to dowry death by the petitioners and coaccused/husband of the deceased.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the petitioners are other than
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48799 of 2024(4) dt.18-12-2024 2/2 the husband of the deceased and they are separate in mess and business. He further submits that petitioners have nothing to do in the matrimonial life of the deceased. He further submits that deceased was married to accused/husband against her will and she was not satisfied with her marriage and hence, she has committed suicide.
5. It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the petition that petitioners have never moved before this Hon'ble Court for grant of Anticipatory bail or Regular bail.
6. It is also stated in paragraph no.3 of the petition that the petitioners have no criminal antecedent.
7. However, Ld. APP for the State vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioners for bail submitting that the alleged offence is serious in nature.
8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and serious nature of the allegation, I am not persuaded to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail.
9. Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioners for anticipatory bail stand rejected.
(Jitendra Kumar, J.) ravishankar/- U T