Ram Balak Mandal v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.3649 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -127 Year- 2013 Thana -MARAUNA District- SUPAUL ====================================================== Ram Balak Mandal S/O Late Kapileshwar Mandal Resident of villParsouni,P.S-Marauna,Distt.-Supaul .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/ : Mr. Ramchandra Jha Raman For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. M.Haque(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 14-05-2015 The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Marauna P.S.Case No. 127/2013 instituted under Sections 324, 307, 302, 436, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of Sri S.C. Srivastava, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Supaul, District- Supaul.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the in the FIR the informant- Choukidar no.21 has alleged that on 16.11.2013 at 10.30 hrs he was on patrolling duty in his locality and got knowledge that one Jibachha Mandal assaulted his wife Sanjha Devi and his daughter-in-law Buchi Devi brutally with Kudal and thereafter Sanjha Devi became injured and thereafter Sanjha Devi died and her dead body has been thrown in the Kosi river

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.3649 of 2015 (3) dt.14-05-2015 2/2 with the help of other accused persons named in the fardbeyan. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the main allegation is against Jibachh Mandal, who is alleged to have assaulted the deceased and caused injury to his daughter-in-law. So far petitioner is concerned, he is village quack and he had gone to treat the deceased and the injured and except this, there is nothing against the petitioner.

On behalf of the State, it has been submitted that it is a case under Section 302 of the Indian penal Code and the petitioner has participated in the occurrence.

Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

However, if the petitioner surrenders in the court below within a period of six weeks and seeks regular bail, the same shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order of rejection and the court below will consider the submission made on behalf of the petitioner.

(Sudhir Singh, J) singh/- U T