Parshuram Chauhan @ Parshuram Chaudhan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74991 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-105 Year-2023 Thana- TRIVENIGANJ District- Supaul ====================================================== 1.

Parshuram Chauhan @ Parshuram Chaudhan Son of Late Bhupendra Chauhan Resident of Village - Latuna, Ward No. 3, P.S. - Triveniganj, District - Supaul 2.

Sarita Devi Wife of Parshuram Chauhan @ Parshuram Chaudhan Resident of Village - Latuna, Ward No. 3, P.S. - Triveniganj, District - Supaul ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Gopal Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Tarkeshwar Nath Thakur ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 17-01-2025 1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2.

The petitioners seek bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 498A, 307 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the D.P. Act and later on under Section 304B of the I.P.C.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant, being father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased. It is further submitted that the petitioners are in custody since 13-7-2024. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that allegations as alleged in the FIR are general and omnibus in nature. It is also submitted that informant is not an eyewitness to

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74991 of 2024(2) dt.17-01-2025 2/2 the occurrence and whenever any occurrence of the nature as alleged in the FIR occurs, the entire family members of the husband are implicated. It is also submitted that the husband of the deceased is in custody. It is next submitted that the petitioners will abscond rather will cooperate in the trial to prove their innocence.

4.

Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioners.

5.

Considering the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioners, let the petitioners above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Triveniganj P.S. Case No. 105 of 2023.

6.

However, if the learned trial court comes to a conclusion that the petitioners after their release are trying to delay the trial in any manner, the learned trial court shall forthwith cancel their bail bonds after recording reasons. (Satyavrat Verma, J) SUMIT/- U T