Raj Kishore Sahni v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.21593 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -59 Year- 2008 Thana -SARAIYA District- MUZAFFARPUR ======================================================
1. Raj Kishore Sahni, S/o Late Khokha Sahni, Resident of MohallaSikendarpur Kundal, P.S.- Town, District- Muzaffarpur. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar @ S.K. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Ashok Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 07-07-2017 Heard both sides.
The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Saraiya P.S. Case No. 59/2008, registered for the offences punishable under Section(s) 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The mother of the deceased alleged that her daughter was married with Ram Babu Sahni, but Ram Babu Sahni used to assault her daughter after taking wine. Her daughter came to her house and she was living in the house of the informant for the last ten days of the occurrence. The informant further alleged that Ram Babu Sahni and his brother-in-law Rajdev Sahni came to her house when she went outside to work. Ram Babu Sahni and Rajdev Sahni killed her daughter and fled away after locking the house from outside.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21593 of 2017 (3) dt.07-07-2017 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. The petitioner is brother of Ram Babu Sahni, but it transpired during course of investigation that the villagers of the informant categorically stated that the petitioner was also with Ram Babu Sahni on the date of occurrence and they were seen in the village. Considering the nature of allegation made against the petitioner and the fact that the case is of the year 2008 and the petitioner has filed petition for anticipatory bail after nine years, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner, above named, on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.) Rakhi U T