Vikash Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7115 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-79 Year-2019 Thana- PIPRA District- Patna ====================================================== VIKASH KUMAR Son of Dineshwar Rai Resident of Village - Shekhpura, P.S.- Pipra, Distt - Patna. (Bihar) ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Gajendra Nath Ojha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Bal Mukund Prasad Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 30-06-2020 As of now the Courts have not resumed normal physical hearing, the matter has been listed today for consideration through Video Conferencing.

The learned counsels are appearing and making submissions from their residence. The Court Master and Secretary are also part of this virtual court proceedings from their homes, all with the aid of audio visual technology.

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State.

Petitioner apprehends arrest in Pipra PS Case No. 79 of 2019 registered under Sections 341, 323, 498(A), 304(B)/ 34 of the IPC and Sections 3⁄4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The FIR is the statement of the victim. The allegation is that she died due to administration of poisonous substance. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was engaged in the profession of driving tempo at Patna. The victim, his wife, has committed suicide in his absence at the village home.

Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. It is submitted that being husband the petitioner has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7115 of 2020(3) dt.30-06-2020 2/2 been named in the FIR and he owes prime responsibility for the safety and well being of his wife.

Having considered the rival submissions this Court for the present is not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

This application is rejected.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) SNkumar/- U T