Ram Prasad Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.20286 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -81 Year- 2016 Thana -JHAJHA District- JAMUI ====================================================== Ram Prasad Sah, Son of Palakdhari Sah, Resident of Village- Dariyo, Police Station- Jhajha, District- Jamui, .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Amrendra Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 04-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Jhajha P.S. Case No. 81 of 2016, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 304 (B), 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Allegedly, Basanti Devi the sister of the informant was married to Gopal Sah, the son of the petitioner and out of wedlock there are two sons and one daughter. Allegedly, the petitioner and others in-laws started demanding one motorcycle and one lakh by way of additional dowry and due to nonfulfillment she was being tortured and assaulted, she was caused threats and ultimately the sister of the informant was killed and her dead body was made traceless by the petitioner and others. Submission is of false implication and that in this

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20286 of 2017 (3) dt.04-07-2017 2/2 case Yugal Saw @ Yugal Sah and Manik Saw have been allowed pre-arrest bail vide Cr. Misc. No. 33091 of 2016 by order dated 23.09.2016 by another co-ordinate bench of this Court and the case of the petitioner is on similar footing, there is no specific allegation against the petitioner and the allegations are omnibus and general in nature and, as such, the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration.

The learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer of pre-arrest bail by submitting that the petitioner is the father-in-law. In the facts and circumstances as stated above, considering that Yugal Saw @ Yugal Sah and Manik Saw who are brother-in-law of the deceased have already been allowed prearrest bail and, as such, the petitioner in the event of his arrest or surrender within four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Jamui, in connection with Jhajha P.S. Case No. 81 of 2016, subject to the conditions as laid down in section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J.) Rajiv/- U T