Sintu Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17254 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-189 Year-2018 Thana- ALOULI District- Khagaria ====================================================== SINTU YADAV Son of Prakash Yadav Resident of Village - Satghatta, P.S.- Alauli, Distt - Khagaria.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shekhar Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shailendra Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 26-07-2019 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Alauli Police Station Case No. 189 of 2018, disclosing offences under Sections 304-B/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation in the First Information Report is that the marriage of the daughter of the informant was solemnized with the petitioner in March, 2017 and on 21.06.2018, the informant received a call from her daughter that her in-laws were demanding Rs. 20,000/- as dowry for construction of house, which was refused by her. On 22.06.2018, at about 7 AM, the informant got information through the brother-in-law of her daughter that her daughter had fallen ill and was admitted in a private hospital and when the informant along with other

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17254 of 2019(5) dt.26-07-2019 2/3 family members reached the hospital, she could not find her daughter admitted in the hospital and it is alleged that the villagers disclosed that accused persons have assaulted and killed the daughter of the informant by pressing her neck due to non-fulfillment of the demand of dowry.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and there is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner, who is the husband of the deceased and the deceased died due to diarrhoea. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that daughter of the informant has been killed by the accused persons within seven years of her marriage in mysterious circumstances and the dead body has been disposed of in order to conceal the evidence.

After having heard learned Counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the deceased has died in her matrimonial house within seven years of her marriage in mysterious circumstances and the dead body was cremated by the petitioner and his family members in the absence of the parents of the deceased, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of anticipatory bail.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17254 of 2019(5) dt.26-07-2019 3/3 This application is, accordingly dismissed.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J.) Prabhakar Anand/- U √ T √