Chandan Kumar @ Chandan Pandit v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10106 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-483 Year-2020 Thana- PHULWARISHARIF District- Patna ====================================================== Chandan Kumar @ Chandan Pandit, aged about 26 years, Gender-Male, S/O Mohan Pandit, Resident of Village- Kurji, P.O- Mohammad Pur, P.SPhulwarisharif, District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Bishwajeet Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Rita Verma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 12-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 304B and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per allegation in the FIR, petitioner along with his family members have tortured in various ways to the daughter of the informant due to non-fulfilment of additional dowry demand and ultimately she was being killed by administering poison.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He next submits that earlier the petitioner was filed anticipatory bail petition before this Court but the prayer for anticipatory bail of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10106 of 2025(3) dt.12-05-2025 2/2 this petitioner was rejected vide Cr. Misc. No. 23298 of 2021 and again the petitioner was filed regular bail before this Court but the prayer for regular bail was also rejected vide Cr. Misc. No. 62820 of 2022. Petitioner is the husband of the deceased and he is in custody since 02.03.2022.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that petitioner is the husband of the deceased and the petitioner is sole responsible to take care of the daughter of the informant.

6. On perusal of the first information report and impugned order dated 14.09.2022, it appears that the deceased was died due to poison and there is strong evidence in the case diary which shows that before the death, the deceased was subjected to cruelty for non-fulfilment of dowry demand and the petitioner is the husband of the deceased, so I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is again rejected.

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Brajesh Kumar/- U T