Patna High Court - Orders
Tek Narayan Prasad @ Tek Narayan Prasad ... vs The State Of Bihar on 21 October, 2014
Author: Vikash Jain
Bench: Vikash Jain
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23594 of 2014 (4) dt.21-10-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.23594 of 2014
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -213 Year- 2013 Thana -SIRDALA District- NAWADA
======================================================
1. Rekha Kumari @ Rekha Devi Wife of Vijay Pratap Resident of Village-
Neemchak Pasarhi, P.S.-Meskaur (Sirdalla), District-Nawada.
2. Kanchan Devi Wife of Ram Nandan Prasad Resident of Village-Raut
Bigha Jhunathi, P.S.-Mufasil, District-Nawada.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
.... .... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
Criminal Miscellaneous No.24340 of 2014
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -213 Year- 2013 Thana -SIRDALA District- NAWADA
======================================================
1. Tek Narayan Prasad @ Tek Narayan Prasad Yadav son of Late
Vidyadhar Prasad Yadav resident of village - Neemchak Pasarhi, P.S.
Meskaur ( Sirdalla ), District - Nawada
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
.... .... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In Cr.Misc. No.23594 of 2014)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Durgesh Nandan,Adv
For the Opposite Party/s : APP
(In Cr.Misc. No.24340 of 2014)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Durgesh Nandan,Adv
For the Opposite Party/s : APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN
ORAL ORDER
4 21-10-2014Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 302, 201/34 IPC registered in connection with Sirdalla (Meskaur) P.S. Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23594 of 2014 (4) dt.21-10-2014 Case No. 213 of 2013.
3. It is submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated and it is highly improbable that the family members would commit such an offence. It is further submitted that the deceased in fact has committed suicide having difference with his wife being the informant.
4. Learned APP assisted by learned counsel for the informant on the other hand opposes the anticipatory bail petition pointing out that the accusation of committing murder of the informant's husband by strangulating him stands duly supported from the post mortem report. Moreover, witnesses in the case diary have also supported the prosecution case.
5. Having regard to the nature of accusations, gravity of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. The bail petition stands dismissed.
(Vikash Jain, J)
Chandran
U T