Robin Dhangar @ Robin Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19226 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-449 Year-2023 Thana- RAXAUL District- East Champaran ====================================================== ROBIN DHANGAR @ ROBIN MAHTO S/O- LATE PARAS MANJHI @ PARAS DHANGAR R/O- VILLAGE- LAXMIPUR DHANGAR TOLI MANSA MAI STHAN, P.S.- RAXAUL, DIST.- EAST CHAMPARAN. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dilip Kumar No.1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 04-04-2024 Heard Mr. Abhishek Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Dilip Kumar No.1, learned A.P.P. for the State

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Raxaul P.S. Case No. 449 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Section 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Raxaul, Motihari, East Champaran.

3. The petitioner along with other co-accused is said to have killed the daughter of the informant on non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has been falsely implicated in this case being the husband of the deceased. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19226 of 2024(2) dt.04-04-2024 2/2 general and omnibus in nature. It is further submitted that as a matter of fact the deceased had an affair with someone and she was forcibly married to the petitioner by her parents and she was living in perturbed mental state, hypertension and depression and she committed suicide by hanging herself. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.

5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that considering the nature of the offence, the petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of case as well as the fact that the petitioner is the husband of the deceased, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail, the learned Court below would pass order in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U T