IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.30067 of 2008 1. AMARJEET RAI @ AMARJEET KUMAR RAI 2. PAWAN RAI 3. UMA RAI 4. SATTAN RAI @ SATYA NARAIN RAI Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 19.11.2008 Heard Learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners who are the family members of the husband, apprehend their arrest in a police case under sections 304B and 201/34 of Indian Penal Code. The submission is that as per the allegation, the deceased was married 10 to 11 years ago. The onus, therefore, shifts on the prosecution to prove as distinct from the presumption against the petitioners. The police after investigation has submitted chargesheet under section 302 of Indian Penal Code It is urged that the petitioners are separate in mess and residence. Counsel for the State from the case diary, submits that there is no material with regard to separate mess and residence. Chargesheet has been submitted on suspicion as the petitioners are alleged to have been seen by co-villager at the time of disposing of the body. Apart from the same, he concedes fairly that there is no material against the petitioners for suspicion, with regard - 2 - to the occurrence in question, neither there is any investigation in the case diary. The nature of investigation conducted by the police in the modern age leaves no option but to direct the petitioners to surrender before the court below within four weeks when they shall be enlarged on bail upon furnishing the bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M. Dalsingsarai in connection with Dalsingsarai P.s. case no. 287/2007.. pkj (Navin Sinha, J)