Chandan Kumar Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.7186 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -23 Year- 2017 Thana -KATRAHA District- VAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ====================================================== Chandan Kumar Rai S/o Nawal Rai, R/o Village- Kanchanpur, Dhanushi, P.S.- Kartahan, District- Vaishali.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prabhat Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Tarkeshwar Nath Thakur ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 2.

17-02-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in relation to Kartahan P.S. Case No. 23 of 2017 registered under Sections 304(B), 34 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the court of learned A.C.J.M. - Vth, Vaishali at Hajipur. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this petitioner is the husband of the deceased however at the time of alleged occurrence he was not present and was serving outside the State as a workman. It is also submitted that the co-accused who are family members of this petitioner have been granted privilege of anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this court.

On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.7186 of 2018 (2) dt.17-02-2018 submits that from the F.I.R. it would appear that the marriage had taken place only on 30.11.2016, and there are allegations of committing torture against this petitioner being the husband and the death having taken place with the four corners of his house does not deserve privilege of anticipatory bail.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, considering that the petitioner is the husband whose marriage had taken place only in the year 2016 and death has taken place within six months of marriage in the house of the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

This application is dismissed.

In case, the petitioner surrenders before the court below and prays for regular bail within a period of four weeks from today, the court below shall consider the same on the basis of the materials available on the record and in accordance with law without being prejudice of the order of rejection of the anticipatory bail application. Rajeev/- (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J.) U T