Patna High CourtCR. MISC./33785/2025bail granted

Dhanjay Ram @ Dhananjay Ram v. The State Of Bihar

2025-09-03Mr. Justice Arun Kumar Jha3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33785 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-364 Year-2024 Thana- ROHTAS District- Rohtas ====================================================== DHANJAY RAM @ DHANANJAY RAM S/O Ram Pravesh Ram R/O Vill.- Samhauta, P.s.- Rohtas, Dist.- Rohtas.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajesh Kumar Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Uday Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 03-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with Rohtas P.S. Case No. 364 of 2024 registered for the offences under Sections 80(2) and 3(5) of the BNS.

3. As per prosecution case, marriage of the daughter of the informant was solemnized with the petitioner in the year 2018. There has been subsequent demand of dowry and on nonfulfillment of this demand, the daughter of the informant was assaulted. On 31.10.2024 the informant came to know that his daughter died and he showed his suspicion that she died due to beating by the petitioner and her other in-laws.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. No occurrence as alleged has ever taken place. True fact of the case is that the marriage was performed in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33785 of 2025(3) dt.03-09-2025 2/3 the year 2015 and the deceased had two daughters aged about 7 years and 3 years, respectively. The daughter of the informant died a natural death as she has been suffering from eosinophilia and high blood pressure. It is not a case of dowry demand as marriage was solemnized in the year 2015 and the petitioner never demanded any dowry. Learned counsel further submits that in the post-mortem report, doctor has opined that the cause of death could not be ascertained until final report of viscera which has been preserved. During investigation, the independent witness examined by the police, has stated about the daughter of the informant being ill and undergoing treatment and dying during this treatment. Petitioner is in custody since 18.11.2024 and chargesheet has been submitted. Petitioner is having clean antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the submission made on behalf of the petitioner. Learned APP submits that petitioner is the husband and there is specific allegation against the petitioner and in-laws of the deceased that they had been demanding dowry and on non-fulfillment of this demand, assaulted the daughter of the informant, who lost her life.

6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the possibility of death occurring after seven years of marriage due to some ailment and further considering the absence of cogent

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33785 of 2025(3) dt.03-09-2025 3/3 material against the petitioner and also considering the period of custody of the petitioner as well as his clean antecedent and submission of charge-sheet, the petitioner above named is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-IX, Rohtas at Sasaram/concerned court in connection with Rohtas P.S. Case No. 364 of 2024, subject to the conditions mentioned in Section 480(3) of the B.N.S.S. and other following conditions:

(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner.

(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and every date fixed by the court below.

(iii) In case of absence on three consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the court concerned.

(Arun Kumar Jha, J) balmukund/- U T