Munna Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35207 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-56 Year-2020 Thana- KUDHNI District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Munna Rai S/o Nandu Rai R/o village- Rampur Balara, P.S.- Kudhani, District- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sheo Kumar Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms.Dr. Indiwar Kumari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 25-01-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State through video conferencing. The petitioner seeks bail in Kudhni P.S. Case No. 56 of 2020, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 304(B), 201, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code. As per the prosecution case, all the accused persons including this petitioner committed murder of informant's daughter due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. Petitioner is husband of the deceased.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is innocent and has never demanded any dowry. In fact, deceased has committed suicide in absence of petitioner. The deceased always used to pressurize the petitioner to reside in her Maike, and on denial she committed suicide. It is further

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35207 of 2021(3) dt.25-01-2022 2/2 submitted that after death petitioner informed the informant and in his presence cremation was done, but due to village politics this false case was lodged by the informant. There is general and omnibus allegation. Petitioner is in custody since 16.04.2020 having no criminal antecedent.

Learned APP however, vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

Considering the facts aforesaid and the nature of allegation and the fact that petitioner is husband of the deceased and deceased died in unnatural circumstance within seven years of marriage at her matrimonial home, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) vinita/- U T