Prince Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89444 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-187 Year-2024 Thana- GORAUL District- Vaishali ====================================================== 1.
Prince Kumar S/O Rambabu Rai R/O Village- Sehan Chakaulia, P.S- Goraul (Kathara OP), Distt.- Vaishali, (Bihar).
2.
Rambabu Rai S/O Late Meghnath Rai R/O Village- Sehan Chakaulia, P.SGoraul (Kathara OP), Distt.- Vaishali, (Bihar). ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Shivnandan Bharti, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Vinod Shanker Modi, A.P.P.
For the Informant :
Mr. Hemant Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 21-01-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, informant and the State.
2. Petitioners apprehend arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per prosecution case, all the F.I.R. named accused persons including these petitioners committed murder of the daughter of informant, namely, Rangila Devi due to nonfulfillment of demand of dowry.
4. Petitioner No. 1 is younger brother-in-law and petitioner No. 2 is father-in-law of the deceased.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89444 of 2024(2) dt.21-01-2025 2/3 F.I.R. has been instituted only with a view to blackmail the family members of the husband of deceased. He submits that cunningly informant has not made the husband of the deceased as an accused in this case. Just after the death of the deceased, the informant's side along with husband of the deceased demanded some share in the ancestral land and also cash and when the petitioners refused to accept to the demand, this false and concocted case has been lodged against petitioners and others. Informant is not an eye witness of the occurrence. He further submits that marriage of the daughter of informant took place in the year 2016 with the son of petitioner No.
2 and out of the wedlock she gave birth to three children, therefore, it cannot be believed that there was any harassment for dowry during the said period. Moreover, these petitioners are separate in mess and property and have got no concern with family affairs of the couple. As a matter of fact, it appears that due to feud between the couple, the deceased committed suicide and taking advantage of the situation petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case with ulterior motive. Petitioners claim clean antecedent.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89444 of 2024(2) dt.21-01-2025 3/3 application.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this anticipatory bail is allowed and it is ordered that let the above named petitioners in the event of their arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of eight weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Goraul (Kathara) P. S. Case No. 187 of 2024, subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Navya/- U T