Narendra Chouhan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7439 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-274 Year-2018 Thana- NAVINAGAR District- Aurangabad ====================================================== NARENDRA CHOUHAN Son of Late Jai Ram Chauhan Resident of VillageMahuari, P.S.- Nabinagar, District- Aurangabad. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Kumar Sunil For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 29-05-2020 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

This application for regular bail arises out of Nabinagar P.S. Case No. 274 of 2018, disclosing offence punishable under Sections 304-B, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioner is the husband of the deceased. Father of the deceased is the informant, who has alleged in the FIR that the victim was done to death by her in-laws and her dead body was got disappeared surreptitiously. It is alleged in the FIR that when the informant and his family members reached the matrimonial house of his deceased daughter, he learnt from the villagers that the deceased had been killed by the petitioner and his family members because the demand of giving a

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7439 of 2020(3) dt.29-05-2020 2/3 motorcycle in dowry was not fulfilled.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that there is vague allegation that any demand of dowry was made, non-fulfillment of which could be said to be the reason behind death of the deceased. He has submitted that even the informant has not alleged that there was any demand made by the petitioner and his family members for giving motorcycle in dowry.

On perusal of the FIR, I find that there is no allegation that the informant, being father of the deceased, was ever pressurized to give motorcycle as dowry. I also find substance in submission made on behalf of the petitioner that the FIR does not disclose as to who told the informant that demand of dowry was being made by the petitioner and his family members, non-fulfillment of which led to death of the deceased.

Considering the facts and circumstances and the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner, who is in custody since 19.09.2019, this application is allowed. Let the petitioner, above-named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-(ten thousand), with two sureties of the like amount, each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7439 of 2020(3) dt.29-05-2020 3/3 Magistrate, Aurangabad, in Nabinagar P.S. Case No. 274 of 2018.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) Rajesh/- U T