Devnandan Sharma @ Devenandan Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.64084 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-185 Year-2023 Thana- VAISHALI District- Vaishali ====================================================== 1.

DEVNANDAN SHARMA @ DEVENANDAN THAKUR SON OF LATE JITLAL THAKUR RESIDENT OF DAUDNAGAR PO- DAUDNAGAR, PS VAISHALI DISTRICT VAISHALI AT HAJIPUR 2.

KAUSHALYA DEVI @ SARASWATI DEVI WIFE OF DEVNANDAN SHARAM @ DEVNANDAN THAKUR RESIDENT OF DAUDNAGAR PO- DAUDNAGAR, PS VAISHALI DISTRICT VAISHALI AT HAJIPUR ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mrs.Sudha, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP For the Informant :

Mr.Vinay Kumar Mishra, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 19-03-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

2.

Petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Vaishali P.S. Case No.185 of 2023, registered for the offence punishable u/s 498(A), 302, 201/34 of the IPC. 3.

Allegedly, due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry, the petitioners along with other co-accused used to torture the daughter of the informant and ultimately, they murdered her and concealed the dead body.

4.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners are quite innocent and have not committed any offence. They have been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. Petitioner nos.1 and 2 are the father-in-law and the mother-

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64084 of 2023(5) dt.19-03-2024 2/2 in-law of the deceased and there is no specific overt act against them. The F.I.R. has been lodged after a delay of four days without giving any plausible explanation. Petitioners have no criminal antecedent and several similar situated co-accused have been granted anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 18.10.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No.63859 of 2023. 5.

Learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that the petitioners are also involved in the alleged offence. 6.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on their behalf is hereby rejected.

7.

This application is accordingly dismissed.

8.

However, petitioners are at liberty to surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks and seek regular bail and the learned Court below would pass order, preferably, on the same day, in accordance with law, considering that the petitioners are senior citizens.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) pallavi/- U T