Kamlesh Pandit @ Kamlesh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26181 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-424 Year-2022 Thana- DARIYAPUR District- Saran ====================================================== KAMLESH PANDIT @ KAMLESH, Son of Parma Pandit, R/V- Dongha, PS- and P.O- Dariyapur, Dist- Saran Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Saket Anand, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Umanath Mishra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 24-05-2023 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove defect (s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of four weeks on resumption of physical mode. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Dariyapur P.S. Case No. 424 of 2022 dated 21.07.2022 registered for the offences punishable u/ss 304-B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and the coaccused persons are alleged to have assaulted and killed the daughter of the informant due to non-fulfillment of the demand of dowry.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26181 of 2023(2) dt.24-05-2023 2/2 petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He has further submitted that there is nothing against the petitioner except suspicion. There is no eye witness to the alleged occurrence. Charges have already been framed in this case. The petitioner has got clean antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is the husband of the deceased who is in custody since 23.09.2022.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail petition of the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner is solely responsible for the alleged crime on account of unnatural death of the deceased. The said occurrence took place in the house of in-laws.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the heinous nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on bail.

Accordingly, his prayer for grant of bail is rejected. Learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Gautam/- U T