Sanjeet Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9486 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-28 Year-2024 Thana- Charkapathar District- Jamui ====================================================== Sanjeet Singh Son of Dono Singh @ Gajadhar Singh Resident of VillageMaheshwari, P.S.- Chakrapathar, Distt.- Jamui ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Amresh Kumar Sinha, Adv :
Mr. Vikramadit, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Raj Kishor Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 23-07-2025 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Charkapathar P.S. Case No. 28 of 2024 registered for the offences under Sections 304(B), 201 and 34 of the IPC.
3. The petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and is in custody since 23.09.2024.
4. The allegation against the petitioner is to cause death of his wife due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that deceased wife of petitioner committed suicide and, thereafter, she was cremated in presence of her family members and in-laws. It is submitted that even the independent witnesses
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9486 of 2025(5) dt.23-07-2025 2/3 only supported domestic dispute during the investigation, but none of them stated that the dispute was regarding dowry demand and, therefore, the essential ingredient is lacking in the present case as to lodge FIR under Section 304-B of the IPC. It is pointed out that petitioner is a man of clean antecedent and even this case is not committed to Sessions suggesting prima-facie that conclusion of trial is a remote aspect. While concluding the argument it is submitted that investigation has been completed, for which, charge-sheet has been submitted, as such, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.
6. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State, while opposing the prayer for bail submitted that several witnesses during the course of investigation stated that parents of victim was informed about the occurrence by co-villagers and not by petitioners and his family members. It is also pointed out that there is specific allegation regarding demand of dowry against petitioner as per FIR, where independent witnesses also stated during investigation that relation between deceased and petitioner was strained and there was regular domestic quarrel. It is submitted that even last rites were performed in hurry without conducting post-mortem and there is nothing on record, which may suggest that the death was caused out of suicide as submitted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9486 of 2025(5) dt.23-07-2025 3/3 by learned counsel for petitioner.
7. Considering the aforesaid factual submission and by taking note of fact as petitioner prima-facie failed to explain the death of his deceased wife, which took place in her matrimonial home, where allegation qua demand of dowry is specifically available against petitioner/husband, accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected herewith for the present.
8. However, learned Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial, preferably, within a period of 09 (nine) months from the date of receipt of this order.
9. Let copy of this order be sent to SP, Jamui to ensure the presence of charge-sheeted witnesses, as and when directed by the learned Trial Court, so as to conclude the trial within aforesaid time period, as directed above. (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.) S.Tripathi/- U T