Anuranjan Singh @ Sintu Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.54933 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-100 Year-2021 Thana- UDAKISHUNGANJ DistrictMadhepura ====================================================== ANURANJAN SINGH @ SINTU SINGH S/o Prabhakar Singh Resident of Village-Naya Nagar, Police Station- Udakishunganj, District- Madhepura. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ranjay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bal Mukund Prasad Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 10-05-2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in a case registered under sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the prosecution case, the sister of the informant was married to the petitioner in the year 2010. It is stated that they had four issues out of the said wedlock. The accused persons were regularly torturing and assaulting the sister of the informant for dowry. Information was received by the informant about his sister having been burnt after pouring petrol on her. On reaching the hospital, the informant found his sister to be burnt, being treated in a private clinic. She was referred to another hospital but died on way to the hospital. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case only for the reason that he happens to be the husband of the deceased. From the contents of the FIR itself it would transpire that the sister of the informant was brought to the hospital where

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54933 of 2021(4) dt.10-05-2022 2/2 she was being treated and information was also given to the informant. The marriage has taken place more than 10 years ago and there was no complaint in the past. The couple had four children and there may be a possibility that it may be a case of suicide. The petitioner is in custody since 7.4.2021. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant. It is submitted by learned counsel for the informant that some of the co-villagers have supported the prosecution case in course of investigation.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the material that has transpired in course of investigation, the nature of allegation in the FIR together with the petitioner being the husband of the deceased, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.

(Partha Sarthy, J) Prakash/- U