Case Facts:
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.26684 of 2012 (2) dt.31-07-2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.26684 of 2012 ====================================================== 1. Brahmdatta Sah @ Verma Datta Sah, 2. Jai Prakash Gupta, 3. Kamakhya Sah, 4. Shanti Devi .... .... Petitioner/s Versus State Of Bihar & Anr .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 2 31-07-2012 Heard learned counsels for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners being father, uncle, aunt of the husband and husband himself are apprehending arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under [STATUTE] . The accusation is of killing the sister of the informant after three years of the marriage for non fulfillment of dowry demands. It is submitted that husband petitioner no. 2 was not present on the alleged date of occurrence. The victim died due to accidental fire when she was given medical assistance also. It is further submitted that the informant has subsequently retracted from the initial version. Considering the totality of the accusation, this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to petitioner no. 2. Let the learned court Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.26684 of 2012 (2) dt.31-07-2012 below consider regular bail of the petitioner no. 2 in case the petitioner no. 2 surrenders within six weeks from today in connection with Itarhi P.S. case no. 53 of 2012 pending in the court of learned C.J.M., Buxar. So far as petitioner nos. 1,3 and 4 above named are concerned, keeping in view the fact that the informant retracted from the initial version and the victim was given medical assistance, let them be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of twelve weeks from today on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of aforesaid court in connection with Itarhi P.S. Case No. 53 of 2012 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. Anil/- (Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 201

Statute Text:
Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code. Causing disappearance of evidence of an offence committed, or giving false information touching it to screen the offender, If a capital offence. Whoever, knowing or having reason to believe that an offence has been committed, causes any evidence of the commission of that offence to disappear, with the intention of screening the offender from legal punishment, or with that intention gives any information respecting the offence which he knows or believes to be false; if a capital offence — shall, if the offence which he knows or believes to have been committed is punishable with death, be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine; if punishable with imprisonment for life — and if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment which may extend to ten years, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine; if punishable with less than ten years imprisonment — and if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for any term not extending to ten years, shall be punished with imprisonment of the description provided for the offence, for a term which may extend to one-fourth part of the longest term of the imprisonment provided for the offence, or with fine, or with both.