Dheeraj Singh @ Prince v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7452 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-443 Year-2019 Thana- BIKRAMGANJ District- Rohtas ====================================================== DHEERAJ SINGH @ PRINCE Son of Akshay Singh Resident of Village - Dharupur, Police Station - Bikramganj, District - Rohtas. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajani Kant Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shantanu Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 29-05-2020 Heard Mr. Rajani Kant Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shantanu Kumar, learned A.P.P. for the State through Video Conferencing.

The petitioner seeks bail in Bikramganj P.S. Case No.443 of 2019 registered under Sections 304B, 120B, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The mother of the deceased alleged that she got her daughter married in the year 2015 but after marriage the petitioner and other family members of the petitioner began to demand dowry. On 04.09.2019, the informant got information that her daughter was done to death by her husband and other in-laws and they hurriedly cremated the dead body of her daughter.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was having love with the deceased from before and the marriage was solemnised in the temple. There is no question of demand of dowry after marriage. The Dy.S.P. in his supervision note, in para 64 of the case diary, stated that on the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7452 of 2020(3) dt.29-05-2020 2/2 basis of the statement of the witnesses, it transpired that no demand of dowry was ever made and the deceased died during the course of treatment but it appears from the records that the deceased died within four years of her marriage in her sasural and the informant and other witnesses have made specific allegation of demand of dowry and torture. It further transpired that neither the petitioner nor his family members informed the mother of the deceased before performing her last rites nor any post-mortem was done. The petitioner did not even inform the police about the natural death of the deceased. Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid and nature of allegation made against the petitioner and the fact that the petitioner is the husband of the deceased, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

The trial court is directed to expedite the trial after holding the same on day to day basis and conclude the same within six months from the date of receipt of this order. (Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Saurabh/- U T