Renu Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53432 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-26 Year-2022 Thana- KHANPURA District- Samastipur ====================================================== 1.

Renu Devi W/O Sri Ram Vinay Jha R/O Village- Rajwara, P.S.- Khanpur, District- Samastipur 2.

Ram Vinay Jha S/O Late Ram Baran Jha R/O Village- Rajwara, P.S.- Khanpur, District- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shivam, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Manoj Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 14-02-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioners undertakes to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, within four weeks.

The petitioners apprehends their arrest in Khanpur P.S. Case No. 26 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Section 304(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Samastipur.

Allegation against the petitioners is that they have killed the deceased by throttling her.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53432 of 2022(3) dt.14-02-2023 2/3 It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. They have been falsely implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioners is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. He submits that there petitioner are father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased. He submits that they have neither demanded dowry nor tortured the deceased and they have got no connection with the life style of the deceased and her husband and they are separate in mess and business. He submits that the husband of the deceased was out of station. He also submits that the petitioners have no criminal antecedent. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that the death of the deceased was within two years from the marriage. Hence, they do not deserve privilege of anticipatory bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of case and the fact that the death of the deceased was within two years of marriage, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. However, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail and the learned Court below

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53432 of 2022(3) dt.14-02-2023 3/3 would pass order on the same day in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) anand/- U T