Prakash Thakur v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7016 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-17 Year-2023 Thana- HASANGANJ District- Katihar ====================================================== Prakash Thakur son of Narayan Thakur Village- Gaziya Korgama PSHasanganj Dist- Katihar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ankit Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 09-04-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with S.T. No. 276 of 2023 arising out of Hasanganj P.S. Case No. 17 of 2023 dated 04.02.2023, lodged under Sections 304(B) and 120(b) of the I.P.C. read with Section 3 and 4 of the Dowry and Prohibition Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the F.I.R. has been lodged against 6 named accused persons including the present petitioner. The allegation against them is to torture the informant's daughter for demand of dowry. It was alleged that due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry, they killed the informant's daughter by hanging.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7016 of 2024(3) dt.09-04-2024 2/2 petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case for ulterior motive, whereas daughter of the informant herself committed suicide by hanging. He further submits that the antecedent of the petitioner is clean and he is in custody since 04.02.2023.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that it is a case of Sections 304(B) and 120(b) of the I.P.C.
6. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and therefore, his bail petition is hereby rejected.
7. However, liberty is hereby granted to the petitioner that he may renew his prayer for bail nine months after framing of charge.
(Dr. Anshuman, J) sadique/- U T