Sanjay Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63628 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2025 Thana- UDWANTNAGAR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== 1.
Sanjay Singh Son of Jhagru Yadav Resident of Village- Khalisa, P.S.- Udwantnagar, District- Bhojpur.
2.
Bansnarayan Kumar @ Botal @ Mukesh Singh Son of Sanjay Singh Resident of Village- Khalisa, P.S.- Udwantnagar, District- Bhojpur. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Ramesh Singh Son of Mahangu Singh R/o Village - Salempur, P.S. - Chandi, Dist. - Bhojpur.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Raju Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Anand Kishore Choudhary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-10-2025 1.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that informant is not an eye-witness to the occurrence and petitioners, being father-in-law and elder brother-in-law of the deceased, came to be implicated. It is also submitted that whenever any dispute arises in between the husband and the wife and the occurrence of the nature as alleged takes place, the entire family members are implicated in a mechanical manner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63628 of 2025(3) dt.16-10-2025 2/2 with general and omnibus allegation. It is further submitted that victim was married to the son of the petitioner No. 1 and she committed suicide.
3.
Learned APP opposes the anticipatory bail application and submits that investigation is still continuing. 4.
At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the anticipatory bail application with liberty to surrender and seek regular bail. 5.
Permission is accorded.
6.
Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty aforesaid. 7.
It is made clear that the learned district court while considering the regular bail shall not be prejudiced by the fact that petitioners before this court withdrew the anticipatory bail application.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T