Bindeshwar Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.777 of 2015 ====================================================== Bindeshwar Rai, Son of Yogendra Rai, resident of Village- Ahamadpur Bariyarpur, Police Station- Rajapakar, District- Vaishali. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Madan Jeet Kumar, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 14-05-2015 The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Rajapakar P.S. Case No. 73 of 2011, corresponding to G.R. No. 1380 of 2011 for the offences instituted under Sections 498(A), 304(B), 201 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the informant has married his daughter, Anita Kumari, with the accused petitioner Bindeshwar Rai on 10.12.2010 and after marriage, his daughter went to her Sasural where accused petitioner and other co-accused persons started demanding a Hero Honda Motorcycle and colour T.V. and on refusal the daughter of the informant was subjected to torture and cruelty in various way. Lastly, all the accused persons after hatching conspiracy committed murder of his daughter on

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.777 of 2015 (4) dt.14-05-2015 2 / 2 14.03.2011 and disappeared her dead body.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the deceased has died due to snake bite. It has further been submitted that the brothers of the deceased had participated in the last rituals of the deceased. Further it has been submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. Further it has been submitted that number of witnesses, in course of investigation, have supported that the deceased died due to snake bite.

On behalf of the State, it has been submitted that the petitioner is the husband of the victim and he is to explain about death of the deceased.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with Rajapakar P.S. Case No. 73 of 2011, corresponding to G.R. No. 1380 of 2011, pending in the court of the learned J.M. Ist Class, Vaishali at Hajipur. Anyhow, the court below shall not prejudice by this order while considering prayer for regular bail of the petitioner and further may take into the account the submissions made on behalf of the parties. U.K./- (Sudhir Singh, J) U T