Mithu Bind @ Mithu Jamadar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23823 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-29 Year-2018 Thana- BELCHHI District- Patna ====================================================== MITHU BIND @ MITHU JAMADAR Son of Uday Bind @ Uday Jamadar Resident of Village- Korari, P.S.- Belchhi and District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Deepak Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Md. Aslam Ansari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 12-04-2019 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Belchhi P.S. case No. 29 of 2018 registered under Section 304B/34 of the IPC.

The informant alleged that he solemnized marriage of his daughter with the petitioner two years ago. The petitioner and his family members were torturing his daughter and due to non fulfillment of demand of dowry they killed his daughter. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a labour. He is working outside his village. The wife of petitioner committed suicide. Sri Devi, grand mother-inlaw of deceased, has already been granted anticipatory bail. One of the brothers-in-law, Ravindra Kumar, has also been granted anticipatory bail and in the case of father-in-law case diary is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23823 of 2019(2) dt.12-04-2019 2/2 called for. Grand father-in-law of deceased has been granted regular bail. Of course, the petitioner is husband of deceased but no specific allegation of demand of dowry and assault is made against the petitioner but from perusal of the FIR itself it appears that marriage of deceased with petitioner was solemnized only two years ago. Wife of the petitioner died in suspicious circumstances. On the date of death the deceased informed her brother about the torture given by the petitioner and others and when the brother and father along with others came they saw the dead body of deceased lying inside the house and family members were not present.

Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid and the nature of allegation made against the petitioner and the fact that petitioner is husband of the deceased and his wife died unnatural death within two years of her marriage, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) BKS/- U T