Sandeep Patel v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3901 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-301 Year-2021 Thana- EKMA District- Saran ====================================================== Sandeep Patel Son of Laxman Patel Resident of Village - Parsagarh Bazar, P.S.- Ekma, District - Saran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mrs.Pushpa Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 01-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Ekma P.S. Case No. 301/21, registered for offence punishable under Sections 304(B), 498(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per prosecution case, daughter of the informant was married with this petitioner in November, 2019 and it is alleged that she was subject to cruelty and harassment by the accused persons, named in the FIR, including this petitioner for dowry, as a result of which, she died during treatment at PMCH on 02.07.2021.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has been made accused merely because he happens to be husband of the deceased. At no point

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3901 of 2025(4) dt.01-07-2025 2/2 of time, petitioner demanded any dowry or committed torture to the deceased. In fact, the deceased died due to fall in the courtyard (Aangan).

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that petitioner is husband of deceased and there is specific and direct allegation against him of committing torture and demanding dowry. Postmortem report shows that deceased died due to shock & haemorrhage caused by hard & blunt object. Deceased has died in an unnatural circumstances within seven years of marriage at her matrimonial home.

6. Considering the nature and gravity of offence and the fact that petitioner is husband of the deceased and there is specific and direct allegation against him, the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay U T