Anil Kumar Pandit @ Anil Pandit v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4898 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-151 Year-2024 Thana- WARISNAGAR District- Samastipur ====================================================== 1.

Anil Kumar Pandit @ Anil Pandit S/o Hare Kishan Pandit @ Hare Kishun Pandit R/o Village- Satmalpur, PS- Warishnagar, Ward No.- 4, DistSamastipur 2.

Tuna Devi W/o Anil Kumar Pandit @ Anil Pandit R/o Village- Satmalpur, PS- Warishnagar, Ward No.- 4, Dist- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Sinha For the State :

Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh For the Informant :

Mr. Bijay Bhushan Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 21-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Wargisnagar P.S. Case No.151 of 2024, registered for the offence punishable u/s 498A, 304B, 34 of the IPC and 3/4 of D.P. Act. 3.

As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and other coaccused persons are said to have killed the daughter of the informant due to non-fulfillment of demand for dowry. 4.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. He has been falsely implicated in this case due to enmity. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner. There is no allegation of demanding dowry

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4898 of 2025(2) dt.21-02-2025 2/2 against the petitioner. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent and has been rotting in judicial custody since 12.11.2024. 5.

Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail. It is submitted that the daughter of the informant died in her matrimonial house within four months of marriage.

6.

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case as well as considering the nature of offence, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The prayer for grant of bail on his behalf is hereby rejected.

7.

Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

8.

However, petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) shikha/- U T