Chandrama Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35497 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-216 Year-2019 Thana- PARSA District- Saran ====================================================== CHANDRAMA RAM Son of Supan Ram Resident of Village - Sobhey Parsa, P.S.- Parsa, Distt.- Saran at Chapra.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Krishna Kumar Yadav, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Nazir Ansari, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 24-01-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State through virtual court proceedings. Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within a period of four weeks after complete start of the physical Court. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Parsa P.S. Case No. 216 of 2019 instituted for the offences under Sections 304(B), 328 and 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 05.03.2021, is a person with clean antecedent, charge-sheet has been submitted and charges have also been framed and the trial is going on.

The allegation as alleged in the FIR is that the informant alleges that his daughter (deceased) was married with the petitioner on 18.05.2019 and after marriage the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35497 of 2021(4) dt.24-01-2022 2/3 and his family member started demanding Rs.2,00,000/- and a gold chain and on non-fulfillment of the demand led to killing the deceased by poison.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. The deceased was a lady with frail health and she fell ill and she was taken to the Doctor and further no person would kill his own wife within such a short span of time.

Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner and submits that the marriage took place on 18.05.2019 and she died within 40 days of marriage i.e. on 30.06.2019 and further para 8 of the bail application records that she might have taken poison which itself indicates that the deceased was perturbed and anguished by the conduct of the petitioner and his family member, hence, they also apprehend that she might have taken poison. Considering the fact that the petitioner is the husband and para 8 of the bail application records that she might have taken poison which in itself demonstrate that the petitioner was apprehensive that his wife might have committed suicide by consuming poison, the Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner in connection with the aforesaid case pending in the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35497 of 2021(4) dt.24-01-2022 3/3 Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saran at Chapra. Accordingly, prayer for bail is refused.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T