Raju Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8829 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2021 Thana- RAGHUNATHPUR District- Siwan ====================================================== RAJU RAM S/o Rama Ram R/o Village- Tari Bazar, P.S.- Raghunathpur, Distt- Saran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 06-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Raghunathpur P.S. case No. 27 of 2021 instituted for the offence under Sections 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code. As per allegation in the FIR, the informant alleged that the petitioner, being husband of the deceased along with other co-accused persons killed her daughter by pouring kerosene oil. Thereafter, this case has been lodged. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and committed no offence. The petitioner is husband of the deceased due to which he has falsely been implicated in this case. It is further submitted that marriage of petitioner was solemnized with the deceased in the year of 2011

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8829 of 2023(3) dt.06-07-2023 2/2 and no allegation of demand of dowry has been made against him, hence no case u/s 304B of I.P.C is made out. The petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and languishing in judicial custody since 22.11.2022.

Learned APP appearing for the state has opposed the prayer of regular bail and submitted that the petitioner is husband of the deceased upon whom, ample responsibility to keep his wife well. The postmortem report of the deceased, annexed with the case diary supports the prosecution wherein, doctor opined that the cause of death is due to Hypovolemic shock & secondary infection. It is further submitted that witnesses of this case have also supported the prosecution. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as soon as possible.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) lata/- U T