Ram Nath Sah vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 4693 Patna

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                  CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37701 of 2020
       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-330 Year-2020 Thana- SIWAN MUFFASIL District- Siwan
     ======================================================

1. Ramnath Sah, aged about 55 years (M), S/o Late Bachan Sah

2. Gandhari Devi, aged about 50 years (F), W/o Ramnath Sah

3. Tuntun Sah, aged about 35 years (M), S/o Ramnath Sah

4. Niraj Kumari @ Miji Kumari, aged about 18 years (F), D/o Ramnath Sah

All R/o Village- Jhunapur Dakshin Tola, P.S.- Mahadeva O.P., District- Siwan.

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

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abdul Mannan Khan, Advocate For the State : Ms. Veena Kumari Jaiswal, APP For the Informant : Mr. Harendra Prasad, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 17-09-2021

The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

2. Heard Mr. Abdul Mannan Khan, learned counsel

for the petitioners; Ms. Veena Kumari Jaiswal, learned

Additional Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the

'APP') for the State and Mr. Harendra Prasad, learned counsel

for the informant.

3. The petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with

Siwan Muffasil (Mahadeva OP) PS Case No. 330 of 2020 dated

16.07.2020, instituted under Sections 304(B)/120(B)/34 of the

Indian Penal Code.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37701 of 2020 dt.17-09-2021

4. The allegation against the petitioners, who are

father-in-law, mother-in-law, elder brother of the husband and

sister, respectively, of the husband of the deceased, is of killing

her due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that

the allegations made in the FIR are totally false as never during

three years of marriage, there was any complaint made before

any authority relating to any demand or maltreatment, much

less, assault. Learned counsel submitted that the deceased had

committed suicide and, thus, in the post-mortem, the doctor has

only found mark of rope around the neck and has opined that the

death was on account of "asphyxia due to hanging and looks

like suicidal", as has been recorded in the order of the learned

In-charge 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Siwan dated

21.09.2020 in Anticipatory Bail Petition No. 1490 of 2020, by

which the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners had been

rejected. Learned counsel submitted that there being no other

mark found on the body fortifies the argument that it is a case of

suicide. Learned counsel submitted that the cause of suicide is

also not known to the petitioners as it was a personal issue

between the deceased and her husband, who is already in

custody. Learned counsel submitted that the informant has also Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37701 of 2020 dt.17-09-2021

compromised the matter and an affidavit to this effect has been

filed before the Court below in which it has been stated that

there was neither any demand earlier for dowry nor was she

killed by the accused. It was submitted that the petitioners also

do not have any other criminal antecedent.

6. Learned APP submitted that there is allegation of

demand of dowry and also of killing of the deceased by the

petitioners.

7. Learned counsel for the informant submitted that it

was a case of murder and the petitioners also had a role.

However, on a specific query of the Court as to how he had been

instructed by the informant to oppose the present application in

the face of him having filed compromise before the Court

below, learned counsel submitted that he had not been instructed

by the informant in this regard.

8. Having considered the facts and circumstances of

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

Court finds that there are indications to the effect that the

petitioners, who are in-laws of the deceased, may not be

responsible for such death, more so in view of the finding in the

post-mortem where it has been opined that the death was due to

asphyxia by hanging and it appeared to be a case of suicide and Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37701 of 2020 dt.17-09-2021

also that an affidavit by the informant has been filed before the

Court below compromising the mater and stating that the

petitioners have not committed any offence as also the

petitioners not having any other criminal antecedent, the Court

is inclined to allow the prayer for pre-arrest bail.

9. Accordingly, in the event of arrest or surrender

before the Court below within six weeks from today, the

petitioners be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.

25,000/- (twenty five thousand) each with two sureties of the

like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial

Magistrate, Siwan in Siwan Muffasil (Mahadeva O.P.) PS Case

No. 330 of 2020, subject to the conditions laid down in Section

438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and further (i)

that one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioners,

and (ii) that the petitioners shall cooperate with the Court and

the police/prosecution. Failure to cooperate shall lead to

cancellation of their bail bonds.

10. It shall also be open for the prosecution to bring

any violation of the foregoing conditions by the petitioners, to

the notice of the Court concerned, which shall take immediate

action on the same after giving opportunity of hearing to the

petitioners.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37701 of 2020 dt.17-09-2021

11. The petition stands disposed of in the

aforementioned terms.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)

Anjani/-

AFR/NAFR U T