Vikas Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16465 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-716 Year-2019 Thana- MADHAURAH District- Saran ====================================================== VIKAS RAI Son of Krishna Rai Resident of Village- Gaura Baban, P.S.- Marhowra, District- Saran at Chapra.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Krishna Kumar Yadav For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Damodar Prasad Tiwary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 18-06-2020 Heard both sides.

The matter has been taken up through video conferencing.

The petitioner seeks bail in Madhaurah (Gaura O.P.) P.S. case No. 716 of 2019 registered u/s 498A, 328, 304B/ 34. The mother of the deceased alleged that four months ago she got her daughter married with Vikas Rai, the petitioner, and since then her daughter was living in her Sasural. Her daughter always informed her on telephone that her husband and other in-laws were subjecting her to different sorts of torture due to non fulfillment of demand of additional dowry. On 18.10.2019 the petitioner called the informant and informed that her daughter was ill and she was being taken to Isuapur for treatment but when again the informant called her son-in-law he did not respond nor took her call. When the informant reached at the house of her daughter she found the dead body of her daughter lying in the courtyard. The informant alleged that petitioner and other in-laws poisoned her daughter to death.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16465 of 2020(3) dt.18-06-2020 2/2 The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that daughter of the informant consumed poison. She was not happy with her conjugal life. The petitioner was taking her for treatment but in the way to hospital the wife of the petitioner breathed her last and petitioner has falsely been implicated in the case.

The learned APP, however, opposed the prayer for bail.

Perused the FIR. It appears that there is specific allegation that petitioner being the husband of the deceased on account of non fulfillment of demand of additional dowry poisoned his wife to death with the help of other in-laws within four months of the marriage of the deceased with the petitioner. Considering the facts aforesaid and the seriousness of offence that a new bride was done to death within four months of her marriage, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) BKS/- U T