Arbind Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12092 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-138 Year-2020 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali ====================================================== ARBIND RAM Son of Raj Kumar Ram Resident of Village- Kushhar Khash, P.S.- Mahua, Distt- Vaishali.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Mukesh Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Pranav Kumar Mr. Jitendra Narain Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 24-03-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

Petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Mahua P.S. Case No. 138 of 2020 registered for the offence punishable under section 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in this case. As a matter of fact, the daughter of the informant suddenly complained of acute stomach pain. She was taken to village doctor who referred her to Sadar Hospital, Hajipur for better treatment but on the way she died.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12092 of 2021(6) dt.24-03-2022 2/2 Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State being assisted by the learned counsel for the informant opposes the prayer for bail and submits that petitioner is named accused in the first information report. It is alleged that petitioner alongwith other family members has killed the daughter of the informant for demand of dowry. Petitioner, therefore, does not deserve to be granted the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Considering the nature of allegations levelled, the materials available on record and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The same is, therefore, rejected.

(Arvind Srivastava, J) mcv/- U T