1. Heard Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, learned Additional Public Prosecutor
(hereinafter referred to as the ‘APP’) for the State.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that he may permitted to withdraw the application on behalf of the petitioner no. 2, as he has already
been arrested. Accordingly, the application on behalf of the petitioner no. 2, Nand Kishor Sahni @ Nand Kishor Sahani stands disposed off as
withdrawn and is restricted to petitioners no.1, Mewalal Sahni @ Mewalal Sahani and 3 Basanti Devi.
3. The petitioners no. 1 and 3 apprehend arrest in connection with Mehsi PS Case No.129 of 2020 dated 14.05.2020, instituted under Sections 304-B,
201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
4. The petitioner no. 3 is the mother-in-law of the deceased, who was the daughter of the informant and the petitioner no. 1 is the younger son of the
petitioner no. 3.
5. The allegation against the petitioners, along with others, is of killing the informant’s daughter and disposing off her body without information to
the informant’s family.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that they are living separately and that she had died due to acute cold, cough, headache, high fever
and body-ache and could not be treated due to lock down. It was further submitted that the informant and his family members came and took part in
the rituals, but to harass the family, this false case has been filed.
7. Learned APP, from the case diary, submitted that a young woman has died in the matrimonial home and witnesses have stated that she died due to
hanging and also that the husband of the deceased is a drunkard and used to regularly assault the deceased and further, that without waiting for the
family of the deceased or the informant or the police, the body was hurriedly burnt. It was submitted that the petitioners no. 1 and 3 being in the same
house are equally responsible for the act which clearly is a crime as death was not natural.
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 petitioners no. 1 and 3.
9. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.
