Patna High CourtCR. MISC./36891/2015dismissed

Manoj Kumar And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

2015-11-23Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.36891 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -36 Year- 2015 Thana -MOKAMAH District- PATNA ======================================================

1. Manoj Kumar, son of Ganga Mahto,

2. Ganga Mahto, son of late Asharfi Mahto, Both are residents of Village and P.O. Shivnagar, P.S. Mokama, Distt. Patna.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raj Nandan Prasad, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. S.D. Singh Yadav, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 23-11-2015 Heard both sides.

The petitioners, namely, Manoj Kumar and Ganga Mahto, apprehend their arrest in a case under Sections 302, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The brother of the deceased made allegation that his sister was done to death and her dead body has not been recovered. The sister of the informant wrote a suicidal note wherein it is alleged that the petitioners are responsible for her death. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are neighbours of the deceased. They have no manner of concern with the deceased and her family members. The deceased did not put her signature in her suicidal note and the authenticity of the suicidal note has not been examined.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.36891 of 2015 (3) dt.23-11-2015 2/2 It appears that the deceased has made a very specific allegation that the petitioners are responsible for her death. It has come during the course of investigation that Manoj Kumar (petitioner no. 1) had illicit relation with the deceased and Ganga Mahto (petitioner no. 2) had threatened the deceased of dire consequence and thereafter she was killed and her dead body was concealed.

Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in Mokama P.S. Case No. 36/15, corresponding to G.R. No. 375/15. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Dilip/- U T