Case Facts:
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.17984 of 2012 (3) dt.10-07-2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.17984 of 2012 ====================================================== Sanju Devi .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with Criminal Miscellaneous No.13925 of 2012 ====================================================== Kailash Thakur .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 3 10-07-2012 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under [STATUTE] . The informant’s son went to sleep with one Govind Kumar and subsequently his dead body was found when FIR was lodged. Subsequently, Govind Kumar stated that on the mobile of the victim a call was received from the petitioners when victim went inside the house of the petitioners. It is further alleged that the petitioner Sanju Devi’s daughter had illicit relationship with the victim and when some agonizing sound was heard, Govind kumar went away. Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.17984 of 2012 (3) dt.10-07-2012 It is submitted that the call verification has been done and the claim of Govind Kumar has not been found true by the police and this theory has been developed subsequently as had Govind Kumar knew about all these things, then the petitioners ought to have been named in the FIR. Considering the circumstantial nature of accusation which is not corroborated during investigation, let the above named petitioners 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 learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi in connection with Parihar P.S. Case No. 28 of 2011 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.