Ranjeet Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28787 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2020 Thana- MADHUBAN District- East Champaran ====================================================== Ranjeet Ram, son of Suresh Ram, resident of Village - Sugapipar, P.S. - Patahi, District - East Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/S

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ranjana Srivastava For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Anurag Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 25-01-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 304(B)/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 10.01.2022, he is a person with clean antecedent and is the husband of the deceased and the informant alleges that the marriage of his daughter was solemnized with the petitioner on 13.03.2019. After marriage, the accused persons including the petitioner started torturing his daughter for dowry and was finally ousted from her matrimonial home. It is next alleged that on 31.12.2019, petitioner came to the house of the informant where the deceased was also staying and slept there and on 01.01.2020 at about 3.00 P. M., petitioner strangulated his daughter to death and after that he fled on the motorcycle of his brother-in-law.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28787 of 2022(3) dt.25-01-2023 2/2 The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is next submitted that it absolutely does not stand to reason that as to why the petitioner would have committed such an occurrence in the parental home of the deceased and thus, would get implicated easily. It is also submitted that just to make out a case, it has been falsely alleged that petitioner had come to the parental home of the deceased where he committed the occurrence. It is next submitted that if petitioner had any intention of killing the deceased, then the same could have been done at her matrimonial home. Learned A.P.P. opposes the bail application.

At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present bail application. Permission is accorded.

Accordingly, instant petition is dismissed as withdrawn. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T