Shibu Raut @ Shiv Raut v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84060 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-171 Year-2024 Thana- SONBERSA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== 1.

Shibu Raut @ Shiv Raut Son of Jogi Raut Resident Of Village -Ghurghura, Ward No 3, Ps- Sonbarsa, Dist- Sitamarhi 2.

Dhanmanti Devi @ Samtoliya Devi Wife of Shibu Raut @ Shiv Raut Resident Of Village -Ghurghura, Ward No 3, Ps- Sonbarsa, Dist- Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Madhura Nand Jha, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 20-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.

2. Petitioners apprehend arrest in Sonbarsa P. S. Case No. 171 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304/34 of the Indian Penal Code to which Sections 323, 302, 504, 506/34 IPC were added later on.

3. As per prosecution case, on 09.06.2024 at about 3 PM, husband of the informant went to the house of co-accused Virendra Mahto to take back amount of Rs. 2 lacs which were earlier lent to him by the husband of informant but later on, she came to know that her husband had been killed. Informant suspects that the F.I.R. named accused persons killed her

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84060 of 2025(3) dt.20-02-2026 2/2 husband due to money dispute.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are not named in the F.I.R. and their names transpired during investigation. During course of investigation, it has also come that at the relevant time, deceased, being drunk, fell down and received injury, leading to his death. Moreover, mother of the deceased has not named these petitioners or alleged anything against these petitioners. Petitioners claim clean antecedent.

5. However, learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that during investigation, two witnesses, namely, Pachu Manjhi and Dupad Manjhi stated that these petitioners assaulted the deceased as a result of which, he died.

6. Considering the nature of accusation and materials available on record, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is refused.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Navya/- U T