Virchandra Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.56671 of 2017 (2) dt.07-12-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.56671 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -22 Year- 2017 Thana -MAHUA District- VAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ====================================================== Virchandra Mahto, S/o Sant Lal Mahto, R/o Vill.- Shahpur Khurd, P.S.- Goraul, Distt.- Vaishali.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. A.M. Mehto, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 07-12-2017 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to make necessary correction in paragraphs 1 and 5 of the bail petition.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Mahua P.S. Case No. 22 of 2017, registered under Sections 341, 323, 324, 326, 307 and 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The accusation is that informant was accompanied by her husband (petitioner) boarding on motorcycle at her 'Maika'. In the way, three persons came on motorcycle behind the motorcycle of her husband (petitioner) and stopped. Thereafter, she was pulled

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.56671 of 2017 (2) dt.07-12-2017 from the motorcycle and brutally assaulted by three miscreants but her husband (petitioner) did not try to save her, and she was admitted in hospital at Muhua. The informant claimed that due to non-fulfillment of demand of cash of Rs.50,000/- and one gold chain, her husband and in-laws made arrangement of miscreant to kill her in which she was attempted by them.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for grant of anticipatory bail stands rejected. The petitioner is directed to surrender before the trial court within four weeks and pray for regular bail, which would be considered by the trial court in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Bhardwaj/- U T