Sikandar Mandal @ Sukhna Mandal @ Sukhna v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.31837 of 2015 (2) dt.13-08-2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.31837 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -64 Year- 2010 Thana -BARIYARPUR District- MUNGER ======================================================

1. Sikandar Mandal @ Sukhna Mandal @ Sukhna Son of Ram Gulam Mandal Resident of village - Bijay Nagar, Police Station - Bariyarpur, District - Munger .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Ranjan For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Gopesh Kumar (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 13-08-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State. This application for grant of anticipatory bail arises out of Bariarpur P.S. case No. 64 of 2010, disclosing offences under Sections 3-4B, 498A and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner is the husband of the deceased. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that seven days after the alleged date of occurrence, the father of the deceased got instituted a complaint case, giving rise to present Bariarpur P.S. Case no. 64 of 2010. He submits that as regards the death of the deceased, U. D case was registered by the Station House Officer in which the informant was also examined.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.31837 of 2015 (2) dt.13-08-2015 Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the informant had stated before the police that the death of the daughter was accidental in nature and subsequently, he filed the complaint case, seven days after the date of occurrence. However, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail in a case where the petitioner is the husband of the deceased and matter is still under investigation which may require his custodial interrogation.

The application for anticipatory bail is rejected. Petitioner is directed to surrender before the Court below within six weeks and seek regular bail, if so advised. If he does so, his application for regular bail shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by rejection of present application for grant of anticipatory bail.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) ArunKumar/- U