Satish Kumar Thakur @ Satish Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.58808 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -188 Year- 2017 Thana -LALGANJ District- VAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ====================================================== Satish Kumar Thakur @ Satish Thakur, S/o Devendra Thakur, resident of Village- Lakhansarai Tej Singh, P.S.- Lalganj, District- Vaishali. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajeev Ranjan No.II, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Sri Parmeshwar Mehta (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 23-01-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Lalganj P.S. Case No. 188 of 2017, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code Parwati Devi @ Sona Devi, was married to the petitioner three years ago due to love affair but both used to quarrel always and on 13.08.2017 at about 1 P.M. information was received that the daughter of the informant has been killed then the informant went there and found the dead body lying on the mat in the courtyard and the petitioner and Bibha Devi both were absconding from the house. It is alleged that both the accused hanged her to death.

Submission is of false implication and that there was

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.58808 of 2017 (3) dt.23-01-2018 2/2 cordial relation between the petitioner and his wife. Due to some patty dispute the wife of the petitioner committed suicide and the informant lodged this false case. During investigation, it has come that for purchasing cloths of children there was some dispute between the petitioner and his wife and then she was found hanging with a tree. The wife of the petitioner has lodged earlier Complaint Case against the informant and others and, as such, the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration. The learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer of pre-arrest bail.

In the facts and circumstances as stated above, considering the allegation attributed against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant privilege of pre-arrest bail to him and accordingly his such prayer stands rejected in connection with Lalganj P.S. Case No. 188 of 2017, pending in the Court of learned C.J.M., Vaishali at Hajipur.

However, the petitioner is directed to surrender and seek regular bail within two months and then his prayer for regular bail shall be considered without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J.) Rajiv/- U T