MITHILESH YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned Special P.P informed the court that the respondent no. 2 was informed through the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna. Yet, none has appeared on behalf of respondent no. 2 and hence, the matter has been put up for hearing.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. The co-accused son of the appellant solemnized marriage with the deceased sister of the informant as well as with co-accused Preeti Kumari on the same day. They were studying in the same coaching center and co-accused Rohit Kumar married both the girls on the same date and this shows the appellants have no control over their son and it is not believable that the father and mother would allow their son to marry two girls at the same time. The co-accused Rohit Kumar started living with his two wives and Preeti Kumari became pregnant and when, the sister of the informant did not get pregnant, some dispute arose and deceased committed suicide. Learned counsel further submits that it was an inter-caste marriage and both the girls were from other community than the community of the appellants and as the deceased belonged to Schedule Caste community the case has been registered under Provisions of the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribes (POA) Act. But the marriage and subsequent events show that there was no issue of any caste acrimony. The learned counsel further submits that the appellants are in custody since 22/3/2022 and charge sheet has been submitted. Learned counsel further submits that the co-accused husband Rohit Kumar is already in custody.