Naushad Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2908 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-203 Year-2019 Thana- GURUA District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.

NAUSHAD SAH Son of Sarfraz Sah @ Sanfaraj Shah Resident of Village - Manda, P.S.- Gurua, District- Gaya 2.

Sarfraz Sah @ Sanfaraj Shah Son of Late Dharmu Sah Resident of Village - Manda, P.S.- Gurua, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Praveen Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Kanhaiya Kishore(App.100) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 18-06-2020 Heard both sides.

The matter has been taken up through video conferencing.

The petitioners seek bail in Gurua P.S. case No. 203 of 2019 registered u/s 304B/34 of the IPC.

The informant, mother of the deceased, alleged that her daughter was married to Nausad Sah, petitioner No.1, but immediately after marriage her husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law began to torture the deceased due to non fulfillment of demand of additional dowry. On 08.09.2019 her daughter was hanged to death by her husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2908 of 2020(4) dt.18-06-2020 2/2 The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the deceased was quarrelsome lady and she does not want to live with the petitioner No.1. The petitioners never subjected the deceased to any sort of torture. The deceased herself committed suicide by hanging. It is further submitted that prayer for bail of Akila Khatoon, mother-in-law of the deceased, has been rejected by this court with an observation that she may renew her prayer for bail after remaining one year in custody. It appears that petitioner No.1 is husband of the deceased and petitioner No.2 is father-in-law of the deceased. There is specific allegation that the husband, the father-in-law and the mother-in-law were subjecting the deceased to all sorts of torture and killed her within one year of her marriage.

Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected. The petitioner No.2, father-in-law of the deceased, may renew his prayer for bail after remaining one year in custody.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) BKS/- U T