Patna High CourtCR. MISC./29820/2017dismissed

Pawan Kumar Rai v. The State Of Bihar

2017-07-10Mr. Justice Sanjay Priya2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29820 of 2017 (2) dt.10-07-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.29820 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -275 Year- 2016 Thana -GARAUL District- VAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ====================================================== Pawan Kumar Rai, Son of Harendra Rai, Resident of Village- Babhantoli, P.S. Goroul, District- Vaishali at Hajipur.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Subodh Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Md. Anzarul Haque Sahara, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 10-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Goroul P.S. Case No. 275 of 2016 instituted for the offence under Sections 304(B), 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

There is allegation against the petitioner that he married with the daughter of the informant after kidnapping her and committed physical and mental torture with her for demand of dowry. On 2.11.2016, he along with others committed murder of the daughter of the informant by burning her and got the dead body disappeared.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that in fact, the victim girl (deceased) was not married with Pawan Kumar Rai (petitioner). She was married to one Mukesh Kumar.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29820 of 2017 (2) dt.10-07-2017 From the written report, it appears that there is specific allegation against this petitioner that he after performing marriage with the daughter of the informant, committed mental and physical torture with her due to non fulfillment of demand of dowry and caused her death by setting her ablaze and got the dead body disappeared.

Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner stands rejected.

(Sanjay Priya, J) S.Ali/- U T