Patna High CourtCR. MISC./72917/2023rejected

Lalita Devi v. The State Of Bihar

2024-07-12Mr. Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72917 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-125 Year-2023 Thana- BARHARA District- Bhojpur ====================================================== 1.

Lalita Devi W/O Late Mithilesh Singh Village- Laxmipur, Ps. Barahara, Dist. Bhojpur 2.

Ankit Singh @ Ankit Raj Singh S/O Late Mithilesh Singh VillageLaxmipur, Ps. Barahara, Dist. Bhojpur 3.

Risabh Kumar @ Abhay Raj Singh S/O Late Mithilesh Singh VillageLaxmipur, Ps. Barahara, Dist. Bhojpur 4.

Nikhil Kumar Singh @ Nikhil Raj Singh S/O Late Mithilesh Singh VillageLaxmipur, Ps. Barahara, Dist. Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Raju Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Kalyan Shankar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 12-07-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, informant and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Barhara P.S. Case No. 125 of 2023 instituted for the offences under Sections 304(B) and 201 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that, there is allegation against these petitioners along with other co-accused is of killing the daughter of the informant.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72917 of 2023(4) dt.12-07-2024 2/2 petitioners have submitted that petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence. Petitioner no. 1 is mother-in-law of the deceased and other petitioners are Devar.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioners and submitted that petitioners are named in the FIR and there is specific allegation of killing the daughter of the informant is against them and the deceased died within two years of her marriage. Hence, the petitioners do not deserve anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and seriousness of allegation, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

7. The prayer is rejected.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Arish/- U T