Amrendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15742 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1004 Year-2023 Thana- JAHANABAD District- Jehanabad ====================================================== AMRENDRA KUMAR SON OF SHIV NANDAN YADAV R/OKARGHARA, P.S.-GHOSI, DISTT.-AURANGABAD ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Priyanka Singh, Adv.

Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, Adv.

For the Informant :

Mr. Jyoti Ranjan Jha, Adv.

Ms. Shrishti Rani, Adv.

Ms. Kusum Kumari, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sharda Kumari, App ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 15-05-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.P.P for the State.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Jehanabad P.S. Case No. 1004 of 2023 dated 19.10.2023 registered for the offence/s punishable u/s 304B read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner along with the co-accused persons is alleged to have killed the sister-in-law of the informant by throwing a poisonous snake on her. It is further alleged that they also used to torture her due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15742 of 2024(4) dt.15-05-2024 2/2 The petitioner neither demanded any dowry nor tortured the deceased. The petitioner is the husband of the deceased. It is further submitted that the petitioner himself informed the informant about snake bite and taking her to Sadar Hospital. The petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 20.10.2023.

5. Learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner and stated that the petitioner is the husband of the deceased and he used to tortured the deceased for the sake of dowry. As per the Postmortem report, the informant's sister-in-law died due to cardio-respiratory failure caused due to asphyxia by compression of the neck.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the heinous nature of allegation against the petitioner , I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

7. The application stands rejected.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) guddukr/- U T