Subodh Rai @ Subodh Kumar vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 3891 Patna

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 35578 of 2020
      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-539 Year-2019 Thana- KHAJEKALA District- Patna
 ======================================================

Subodh Rai @ Subodh Kumar, Male, aged about 25 years, Son of Ram Kripal Rai, Resident of Jafarabad, PS - Raghopur (Rutampur OP), District- Vaishal.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP For the Informant : Mr. Gajendra Kumar Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 02-08-2021

The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

2. Heard Mr. Pramod Kumar, learned counsel for the

petitioner; Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, learned Additional Public

Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the State and

Mr. Gajendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant.

3. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with

Khajekalan PS Case No. 539 of 2019 dated 24.12.2019,

instituted under Sections 304B, 201 and 120B/34 of the Indian

Penal Code.

4. The allegation against the petitioner is that he, along

with other members of the family of the deceased's husband had Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35578 of 2020 dt.02-08-2021

killed her by cutting the neck and also causing various cut injuries

on other parts of the body.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he is

the son of the sister of the husband of the deceased and had no

connection with the affairs of the deceased. It was submitted that

he lives in a different village. Further, learned counsel submitted

that the petitioner does not have any criminal antecedent. It was

submitted that the petitioner has no interest with regard to any

dowry or other issues which the deceased may have had in the

matrimonial home. It was further submitted that the father-in-law

of the deceased has been granted anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate

Bench.

6. Learned APP, from the case diary, submitted that

witnesses have stated that all the family members of the husband

of the deceased were involved in such gruesome crime, including

the petitioner. It was submitted that from the manner in which the

crime has been committed, it is obvious that it could not have

been the work of only one person and, thus, in view of the

petitioner being a young male person and very closely related to

the husband of the deceased and the allegation made by the

informant and other witnesses about his complicity, it cannot be

ruled out that he was not party to the crime.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35578 of 2020 dt.02-08-2021

7. Learned counsel for the informant submitted that the

petitioner being closely related to the husband of the deceased

obviously cannot plead innocence. It was submitted that the

husband of the deceased is still absconding and anticipatory bail

petition of the elder brother of the husband of the deceased and

mother-in-law of the deceased is still pending in the High Court

and despite time being taken, the husband of the deceased has not

surrendered.

8. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the

case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court

is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.

9. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed.

10. Interim protection granted to the petitioner under

order dated 25.06.2021, stands vacated.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)

P. Kumar

AFR/NAFR U T