Raj Kishor @ Raj kishor Kumar v. The State of Bihar
CR. MISC./86287/2024 · 2025-01-31
Prabhat Kumar Singh
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 85360 (PAT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 85360 (PAT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86287 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-126 Year-2024 Thana- KARPI District- Jehanabad ====================================================== Raj Kishor @ Raj kishor Kumar S/o Sukeshwar Bind R/o vill - Mulchand Bigha, P.S. - Karpi, Distt.- Arwal. At present R/o vill - Karpi, P.S. - Karpi, Distt.- Arwal ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sunil Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Jharkhandi Upadhyay ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 2 31-01-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence under Sections 304(B)/ 201 / 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. It is a case of dowry death. It is alleged that all the F.I.R. named accused persons including this petitioner subject daughter of informant to cruelty and harassment for dowry and lastly, they committed her murder and cremated the dead-body in absence of informant and other family members.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is brother-in-law (nsoj) of the deceased. There is general and omnibus allegation. Petitioner is separate in mess
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86287 of 2024(2) dt.31-01-2025 2/2 and property and has got no concern with the affairs of deceased and her husband. He further submits that thrust of the allegation is against husband of the deceased and it is orally submitted that husband of deceased is in custody. Petitioner claims clean antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioners.
6. However, considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the above named petitioners, in the event of arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Arwal in connection with Karpi P.S. Case No. 126 of 2024, subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
anay (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) U T