Raj Kumar Tanti v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.10295 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -48 Year- 2015 Thana -DANDARI District- BEGUSARAI ======================================================

1. Raj Kumar Tanti S/o Late Chhotan Tanti, resident of Village- Dandari, P.S.- Dandari, District- Begusarai.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. B.M.P.Sinha(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 18-04-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. representing the State and also learned counsel for the informant. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Dandri P.S. Case No. 48 of 2015 registered for the offence punishable under Section 304(B), 120(B) and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Babita Kumari, the daughter of the informant was married to Roshan Kumar, the son of the petitioner on 06.05.2015 and allegedly due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry by way of four wheeler, she was being tortured and assaulted and ultimately she was killed by the petitioner and other in-laws, her neck and stomach were found cut.

Submission is of false implication and that the husband

is already in custody, the petitioner is an old father-in-law, he has got no concern with Roshan Kumar, the petitioner is living separately since long, the wife of the petitioner has been allowed bail vide Cri. Misc. No. 6427 of 2016 by another co-ordinate Bench of this Court, petitioner is in custody since 26.08.2015 and, as such, now he deserves sympathetic consideration to which the learned A.P.P. duly assisted by the learned counsel for the informant opposes by submitting that the husband has confessed his guilt wherein he has stated regarding participation of the petitioner also in committing the crime and further the injuries found on the person of the deceased cannot be caused by a single man.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering that the petitioner is father-in-law, chargesheet has already been submitted and there is no chance of tampering with the prosecution evidence and the husband is already in custody and, as such, the petitioner, above named, is also directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M. Vth, Begusarai in connection with Dandri P.S. Case No. 48 of 2015 subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be near relative and another having

sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) sushma/- U T