Nawal Kishore Patel And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.37180 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -88 Year- 2015 Thana -VAISHALI District- VAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ======================================================
1. Nawal Kishore Patel, S/o Late Sobhit Patel.
2. Munni Devi, w/o Nawal Kishore Patel.
3. Poonam Devi, D/o Nawal Kishore Patel.
All are r/v Bhagwanpur Ratti, P.S. Vaishali, District- Vaishali. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anish Chandra, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Parmanand Kumar (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 05-11-2015 Heard both sides.
The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Vaishali P.S. Case No. 88/2015, registered for the offences punishable under Section 304B and other Sections of the Indian Penal Code. The mother of the deceased alleged that her daughter was married on 02.12.2014 with Sohan Patel, the son of Petitioner no. 1, but her husband and other in-laws demanded dowry. She came to know that her daughter was done to death. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner no. 1 is father-in-law, petitioner no. 2 is mother-in-law and petitioner no. 3 is sister-in-law of the deceased. No specific allegation is made against the petitioners. The informant filed a petition in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate accepting
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37180 of 2015 (3) dt.05-11-2015 2/3 that her daughter died due to illness and nobody killed her daughter.
From perusal of records, it appears that within four months of marriage of the deceased with Sohan Patel, the daughter of the informant was killed and her dead body was found from the wheat field. The witnesses have stated that the dead body of the deceased was recovered from a wheat field and the accused persons were torturing her.
Considering the facts aforesaid and nature of allegations made against petitioner nos. 1 and 2 who happens to be father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased, I am not inclined to enlarge petitioner nos. 1 and 2 on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.
So far as the case of Poonam Devi petitioner no. 3 is concerned, she is married sister-in-law of the deceased, she was at her matrimonial house at the time of occurrence. Considering the facts aforesaid, petitioner no. 3 above named in the event of her arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, is directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37180 of 2015 (3) dt.05-11-2015 3/3 to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Vaishali P.S. Case No. 88/2015, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.) Rakhi U T