Madan Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10609 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-325 Year-2022 Thana- DURGAWATI District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== 1.

MADAN RAM Son of Late Dev Ram R/v- Kalwariya, P.S.- Durgawati, District- Kaimur at Bhabhua 2.

DHARMENDRA RAM Son of Madan Ram R/v- Kalwariya, P.S.- Durgawati, District- Kaimur at Bhabhua 3.

PATIRAJI DEVI Wife of Madan Ram R/v- Kalwariya, P.S.- Durgawati, District- Kaimur at Bhabhua 4.

RINKU DEVI @ RINKI DEVI Wife of Dharamraj Ram R/v- Kalwariya, P.S.- Durgawati, District- Kaimur at Bhabhua ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Tribhuwan Narayan For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Priya Sharan Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 27-06-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State. The petitioners have prayed for bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per allegation in the FIR, petitioners have tortured in various ways to the daughter of the informant due to nonfulfillment of dowry demand and ultimately she was being killed by throttling.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10609 of 2023(3) dt.27-06-2023 2/2 has submitted that petitioner no. 1 and 3 are parents-in-law, petitioner no. 2 is brother-in-law and petitioner no. 4 is sister-inlaw of the deceased and all have been falsely implicated in this case. They are living separately with their mess and business. They have no concern either with the deceased or her husband. They have never demanded any thing from the deceased. The sole responsibility to take care of wife is upon husband and not against his family members. Husband is in custody. Petitioners are languishing in judicial custody since 6.11.2022. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The above named petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned CJM, Kaimur at Bhabua in connection with Durgawati P.S. Case No. 325 of 2022.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) sushma/- U