Satpal Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78647 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-306 Year-2024 Thana- BARBIGHA District- Sheikhpura ====================================================== Satpal Kumar S/o Akloo Manjhi R/o Village- Khoja Gachi, P.O. and P.S.- Barbigha, District- Sheikihpura ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dr. Anjani Pd. Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 03-12-2025 1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State, Sri Chandra Bhushan Prasad. 2.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Barbigha PS Case No. 306 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 80, 238 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that her daughter was married to Chandan in the year 2018, out of wedlock two children were born, on 18-11-2023 she received an information that her daughter died, accordingly she along with her family members reached the place of occurrence, but no one was found in the house including her daughter, thus alleges that accused persons including the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78647 of 2025(2) dt.03-12-2025 2/3 petitioner killed her daughter.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that no doubt the death of the victim took place within seven years of marriage, but then from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that no allegation of demand of dowry and torture is alleged. It is further submitted that informant is not an eyewitness to the occurrence and the entire allegation hinges around suspicion. It is also submitted that petitioner is the brother-in-law of the deceased and stays separately from the husband of the deceased and works at Delhi, but then in a mechanical manner the petitioner came to be implicated with general and omnibus allegation. It is next submitted that husband is in custody. 5.

Learned A.P.P., Sri Chandra Bhushan Prasad, for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that it is not the case of the petitioner that the victim did not die rather from pleadings made in the anticipatory bail, it would manifest that a plea has been taken that the victim died on account of snake bite, but then the issue whether the victim died of snake bite or she was killed, is an aspect of investigation, it is next submitted that had the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78647 of 2025(2) dt.03-12-2025 3/3 postmortem of the deceased taken place in that event the cause of death could have been ascertained, it is further submitted that if the victim died on account of snake bite, in that event it was all the more necessary for the accused persons to ensure postmortem of the deceased, but in absence of postmortem, an suspicion is cast on the accused persons that they may also involved in the occurrence, it is submitted that it is not possible for the husband to cremate the dead body singly. 6.

Considering the submission made by learned APP, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7.

Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T