Gopal Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78713 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-352 Year-2024 Thana- NAUBATPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Gopal Choudhary S/o Mundrika Choudhary R/o Village- Dhanki, P.S.- Janipur, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mr. Dhaneshwar Prasad Gupta, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Nand Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 03-01-2025 Heard learned counsels for the parties.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307, 498A, 504, 506 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per prosecution case, daughter of informant, namely Sandhya Kumari, got married to one Ranjeet Kumar in May, 2023 and after eight months of marriage, Ranjeet Kumar died and at that point of time, Sandhya Kumari was pregnant for seven months. Thereafter, on 17.04.2024, she got married with co-accused Ajay Kumar. It is alleged that on 24.06.2024 at about 7 PM, while daughter of informant, namely Sandhya Kumari, was going to the house of her elder sister and reached at Dihra Bridge, all the accused persons named in the F.I.R., including this petitioner, brutally assaulted her due to which she
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78713 of 2024(3) dt.03-01-2025 2/2 received several injuries and during course of treatment, she died.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case merely because he happens to be brother-in-law of co-accused Ajay Kumar, who is second husband of the deceased. Informant is not an eye witness of the alleged occurrence. Allegation of assault is general and omnibus and there is no specific accusation of overt act against this petitioner. Petitioner claims clean antecedent.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and is brother-in-law of the deceased and there is specific and direct allegation that he, along with other accused persons, assaulted the deceased as a result of which she died.
6. Considering the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case and nature of accusation, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T