Dinesh Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12710 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-119 Year-2019 Thana- FATEHPUR District- Gaya ====================================================== DINESH SINGH S/o Raj Kumar Singh R/o village- Raghopur, P.S.- Fatehpur, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Devendra Prasad Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nityanand, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 02-06-2020 The matter has been listed today for consideration through Video Conferencing in view of the Nationwide Lockdown on account of the Covid 19 pandemic. The learned counsels are appearing and making submissions from their residence. The Court Master and Secretary are also part of this virtual court proceedings from their homes, all with the aid of audio visual technology. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

Petitioner seeks bail in Fatehpur PS Case No. 119 of 2019 registered under Sections 114, 302 and 120(B)/34 of the IPC.

The FIR was lodged by mother of the victim girl. The prosecution case is that she had been married with the petitioner since 2004. The allegations are that she has died on account of injuries perpetrated by the petitioner and his family members for non fulfilment of demand of dowry.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12710 of 2020(3) dt.02-06-2020 2/2 Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 12.6.2019. Other co-accused have been allowed bail and that the victim has suffered on account of injuries sustained while she fell down. The petitioner's family has taken due care to give her treatment, since even as per the FIR they have taken her to ANMCH.

Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail. He submits that being husband the petitioner owes prime responsibility towards safety and dignity of his wife (deceased). The post mortem report shows several injuries on various parts of the body including face, on the head, on the hands and the victim has died on account of the injuries sustained. The nature of the allegations are such that the petitioner is not entitled to any leniency or bail in the matter.

Considering the rival submissions, this Court, for the present, is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. This application is dismissed.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) SNkumar/- U T