Patna High CourtCR. MISC./22274/2024dismissed

Md. Jasim v. The State Of Bihar

2024-04-04Mr. Justice Anjani Kumar Sharan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22274 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-99 Year-2010 Thana- MANIYARI District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Md. Jasim Son of Md. Naim Resident of Village- Siwanpatti (Chakbhikhi) P.S. Maniyari District- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Mani Bhushan Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 04-04-2024 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Maniyari P.S. Case No.99 of 2010, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 304B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is that he, in association with other co-accused persons killed the daughter of informant on the pretext of non-fulfillment of demand for dowry.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. No such occurrence, in the manner as alleged, has ever taken place. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. He submits that petitioner is the husband of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22274 of 2024(2) dt.04-04-2024 2/2 the deceased and at the time of occurrence he was living in other city and he had no knowledge about him of being an accused in the present case. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

5. Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail by submitting that there is a delay in filing of the present case as the FIR was lodged against the petitioner in the year 2010 but he has moved before this Court in 2024.

6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as well as considering the delay in filing of present FIR, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on his behalf is hereby rejected.

7. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) shikha/- U T