Saroj Kumar And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.38941 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -19 Year- 2018 Thana -MAJORGANJ District- SITAMARHI ======================================================

1. Saroj Kumar S/o Charitar Ram R/o Village - Kothiyar Vishanpur, P.S. Majorganj, District - Sitamarhi.

2. Shanti Devi W/o Charittar Ram R/o Village - Kothiyar Vishanpur, P.S. - Majorganj, District - Sitamarhi.

.... .... Petitioners

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 10-07-2018 Heard the parties.

The petitioners seek anticipatory bail in connection with Majorganj P. S. Case No. 19 of 2018, registered for offences punishable under Sections 304B and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation against the petitioners, who are husband and mother-in-law of the deceased, is of killing the deceased due to non fulfillment of demand of dowry.

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that while she was cooking food, suddenly caught fire in the sari of the deceased and she received serious injury and no specific allegation has been attributed against the petitioners.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.38941 of 2018 (2) dt.10-07-2018 2/2 Learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer for bail.

Having heard both sides and in view of the facts and circumstances, let the petitioners, above named, surrenders before the court below within a period of six weeks from the date of the order, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi, in connection with Majorganj P.S. Case No. 19 of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of Cr.P.C. with other that bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned and petitioners shall co-operate in the investigation and shall be present before police as and when required otherwise prosecution is at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail bond. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) Sudha/- U T