Abhinandan Giri v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18255 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-75 Year-2022 Thana- GUTHANI District- Siwan ====================================================== ABHINANDAN GIRI Son of Kanhaiya Giri Resident of Village - Belaud, Mathiya, P.S.- Guthani, District - Siwan.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Y.C. Verma, SR. Adv.

Mr. Bijay Prakash Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Sumiran Rai For the Informant Mr. Udit Narayan Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 24-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Guthani P.S. Case No. 75 of 2022 instituted for the offence under Sections 304(B), 302, 201, 34 of the Indian Penal Code. As per allegation in the FIR, petitioner is husband of the informant's daughter (deceased) and he has tortured in various ways to her due to non-fulfillment of dowry demand and ultimately they killed her by assaulting and without informing her parents, set her body on fire after pouring K. oil with a view to wipe off the evidence.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is husband of the deceased and has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18255 of 2023(3) dt.24-07-2023 2/2 been falsely implicated in this case. Neither the petitioner is named in the FIR nor he was present at the place of occurrence. He had never demanded any thing from the deceased and her family members. Petitioner is in custody since 24.11.2022. Learned APP appearing for the State and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that during investigation, several witnesses have supported the prosecution story. Deceased died just after four months of the marriage. During investigation, name of the petitioner has come in restatement of the informant which is mentioned in para 27 of the case diary.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

The trial court is directed to expedite and conclude the trial as early as possible.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) sushma/- U