Lachuman Pawan And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.46499 of 2015 Arising Out of Nauhatta P.S. Case No. -29 Year- 2015 Thana -NAVHATTA District- SASARAM (ROHTAS) ======================================================

1. Lachuman Pawan, Son of Suresh Paswan

2. Suresh Paswan, Son of sadasi Paswan

3. Ful Kumari @ Ful Kumari Devi, wife of suresh Paswan

4. Kiran Devi, wife of Lachuman Paswan All are resident of Vill- Ulahi P. s Nauhatta District Rohtas. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Pandey, Adv. For the State : Mr. Durgesh Nandan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ORAL ORDER 15-10-2015 Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and the State.

The Petitioners seek anticipatory bail in a case instituted for the offence under Sections 304(B), 201, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3⁄4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Considering that the Petitioners are the parents-inlaw, brothers-in-law and they claim to have been living separately, let the Petitioners in the event of surrender, named above, within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order, in connection with Nauhatta P.S. Case No. 29 of 2015, shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.5,000/- (Five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each or any other surety to be fixed by the Court concerned to the satisfaction of Sri Divesh Kumar, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dihri-on-

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.46499 of 2015 (2) dt.15-10-2015 2/2 Sone, Rohtas, subject to the following conditions: (i) That one of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioners who will give an affidavit giving genealogy as to how he is related with the petitioners. The bailor will also undertake to inform the Court if there is any change in the address of the petitioners. (ii) That the affidavit shall clearly state that the petitioners are not accused in any other case and if they are, they shall not be released on bail.

(iii) That the bailor shall also state on affidavit that he will inform the court concerned if the petitioners are implicated in any other case of similar nature after their release in the present case and thereafter the court below will be at liberty to initiate the proceeding for cancellation of bail on the ground of misuse. (iv) That the petitioners will give an undertaking that they will receive the police papers on the given date and be present on date fixed for charge and if they fail to do so on two given dates and delay the trial in any manner, their bail will be liable to be cancelled for reasons of misuse. (v) That the petitioners will be well represented on each date and if they fail to do so on two consecutive dates, their bail will be liable to be cancelled.

(Anjana Prakash, J) S.Ali/- U T