Lav Kush Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33353 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-482 Year-2022 Thana- MANER District- Patna ====================================================== Lav Kush Manjhi S/O Late Dukhan Manjhi R/O Village- Tilahari, P.S- Maner, Distt.- Patna, Bihar.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Udai Shankar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Raj Ballabh Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 23-01-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Maner P.S. Case No. 482 of 2022 instituted for the offence under Sections 304(B) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is a case of dowry death of the informant's daughter by the accused persons due to non-fulfillment of dowry demand. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this present case only because he is the husband of the deceased. There is no prior complain in respect of dowry demand, harassment and assault. It is further submitted that the petitioner was not present at the place of occurrence when this incident took place. A statement has been made in para-3 of this petition that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33353 of 2023(6) dt.23-01-2024 2/2 petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. Moreover, he is languishing in judicial custody since 16.11.2022. Learned APP appearing for the state has opposed the prayer of regular bail and submitted that petitioner is named in FIR and petitioner being the husband of the deceased, had full responsibility to keep his wife with full dignity and honour which he did not do so. During investigation, witnesses supported the prosecution case and from perusal of the postmortem report, the doctor opined that the cause of death of the deceased is asphyxia as a result of throttling. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

The trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as soon as possible.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Shubham/- U T