← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./29930/2022rejected

Sonu Kumar @ Sonu v. The State Of Bihar

2023-02-03Mr. Justice Satyavrat Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29930 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-528 Year-2020 Thana- GORAUL District- Vaishali ====================================================== SONU KUMAR @ SONU SON OF DOMAN RAY R/O VILLAGERUSHULPUR INAYAT BABHANTOLI, P.S.- GORAUL, DISTRICTVAISHALI ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 03-02-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

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

The informant alleges that his daughter was married to the petitioner about two years back and after marriage, dowry was being demanded as detailed in the FIR, it is next alleged that on 28.12.2020, he came to know from the villagers that his daughter has been set ablaze by sprinkling kerosene oil, accordingly, he reached the place of occurrence where he saw the dead body of his daughter.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29930 of 2022(3) dt.03-02-2023 2/2 petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is in custody since 02.03.2022 and is the husband.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case, it is next submitted that informant is not an eye-witness to the occurrence and as far as allegation of demand of dowry is alleged, the same is ornamental.

Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the marriage was only two years old and the presumption, for the present, is against the petitioner being the husband and the occurrence also took place within the confines of the house of the petitioner. Considering the submissions made by the learned A.P.P. for the State, the Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) HarshPandey/- U T