Sunil Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.39151 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -113 Year- 2016 Thana -SHEOHAR District- SHEOHAR ====================================================== Sunil Kumar Singh, son of Nageshwar Singh alias Bikau Singh, resident of village Bhoraha, P.S - Shyampur Bhataha, Distt. - Sheohar. .... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vaidehi Raman Prasad Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Pramod Kumar Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 22-09-2016 Heard Sri Vaidehi Raman Prasad Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Pramod Kumar Pandey, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor.
The petitioner, who is father of the deceased girl, has approached this Court with a prayer to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail in Sheohar P.S. Case No.113/2016 registered for the offence under Sections 302, 201, 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
It was submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that earlier the daughter of the petitioner was kidnapped by accused persons and, thereafter, ransom was demanded. He submits that the daughter of the petitioner was done to death by the kidnappers and, subsequently, to the reasons best known to the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.39151 of 2016 (3) dt.22-09-2016 2/2 police , the petitioner has been made accused by instituting the present F.I.R. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner has been falsely made accused and, as such, it was submitted that the petitioner deserves the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Besides hearing learned counsel for the parties, I have also perused the material on record, particularly the order impugned. After going through the material on record, the Court is satisfied that it is not a case for grant of anticipatory bail. It was case of honour killing. From the material on record, it is evident that there is statement of son of the petitioner under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which categorically states regarding involvement of the petitioner.
I do not find any ground to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail. The petition stands dismissed. (Rakesh Kumar, J) NKS/- U T