Saroj Sao v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.3319 of 2017 (3) dt.15-03-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.3319 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -108 Year- 2016 Thana -MUFFASIL District- AURANGABAD ====================================================== Saroj Sao, Son of Ram Prasad Sao, Resident of Village- Lohani, P.S.- Aurangabad, District- Aurangabad.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bachan Jee Ojha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Ramesh Chandra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 15-03-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Aurangabad (M) P.S. Case No. 108 of 2016 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Munni Devi, the daughter of the informant, was married to the petitioner three years ago and due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry by way of cash of Rs. 1,00,000/- she was killed and burnt in the house.

Submission is of false implication and that there was cordial relation between the petitioner and his wife, no complaint of any kind was ever filed by the deceased or by her relatives, the wife of the petitioner was preparing food and at that time she received burn injury, resulting she died, the petitioner having no criminal antecedent deserves sympathetic consideration as in this

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.3319 of 2017 (3) dt.15-03-2017 case other co-accused have been allowed pre-arrest bail and against the petitioner also there is no specific allegation. Learned APP seriously opposes the prayer of bail by submitting that the petitioner is the husband and during investigation the witnesses have supported the allegation. In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering the allegation attributed against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, accordingly, his such prayer stands rejected.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U T