Ajay Rai @ Botla v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25605 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-103 Year-2011 Thana- MANER District- Patna ====================================================== Ajay Rai @ Botla, aged about 30 years, Male, S/o Vakil Rai, Resident of Village-Dostnagar, Shankarpur, P.S.-Maner, District-Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr.Mukeshwar Daya, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 10-11-2020 Heard the parties through the virtual court proceeding. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Maner P.S. Case No. 103 of 2011 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304(B), 201 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case, in brief, is that one Meena Devi, who happened to be the informant of this case, lodged the instant F.I.R., alleging therein that her daughter Suman Kumari was married with the petitioner on 18.06.2010 and soon after the marriage she was subjected to cruelty for demand of several kinds i.e. T.V. gold chain, etc. and lastly it is alleged that she was killed by the petitioner and other co-accused persons for non fulfillment of dowry demand and disappeared her dead body.

Learned counsel for the petitioner frankly submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25605 of 2020(3) dt.10-11-2020 2/2 though the petitioner is the husband of the deceased, but he has been falsely implicated in this case. There is no specific allegation against the petitioner. The deceased got fired while cooking food for her own father, who was present, when the occurrence took place. He further submits that the co-accused has been granted anticipatory bail by this Hon'ble Court. He further submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and the petitioner is in jail custody since 12.02.2020. He further submits that the charge sheet has been submitted in the present case. Learned counsel for the State submits that the petitioner is the husband and vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

I have perused the record including the case diary. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner in connection with Maner P.S. Case No.103 of 2011 pending in the court of Miss Nutan Kumari, J.M. 1st Class, Danapur is hereby rejected at this stage. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Nasimul/- U T