Babloo Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27610 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-127 Year-2019 Thana- AKBARPUR District- Nawada ====================================================== BABLOO KUMAR Son of Shital Mahto Resident of Village - Paijuna, Police Station - Akbarpur, District - Nawada.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rabi Bhushan Prasad No. 1 For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 02-12-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The petitioner is in custody since06.09.2019 in connection with Akbarpur P.S. Case No. 127/2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304(B)/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the prosecution case, sister of the informant was married with the petitioner in the year 2013. It is further alleged that after marriage, this petitioner started demanding dowry and subjected her to torture and cruelty and on 04.09.2019, the informant got informant that his sister has been killed and dead-body has been disposed of hurriedly without giving any informantion to the informant or his family. It is submitted submitted on behalf of the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27610 of 2020(3) dt.02-12-2020 2/2 that co-accused Shital Mahto (father-in-law) has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 25.10.2019 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 54103 of 2019. It is further submitted that there is no eye-witness to the occurrence and no such demand of dowry was ever made by the petitioner who is husband and the deceased died due to diarrhoea.

Learned APP for the State opposed the bail application and submitted that there is specific allegation of demand of dowry against this petitioner and the petitioner being the husband of the deceased cannot claim parity with the other co-accused.

Considering the aforementioned facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to this petitioner. It is, accordingly, rejected.

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