Patna High CourtCR. MISC./31942/2020dismissed

Ajit Ram v. The State Of Bihar

2021-03-02Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 31942 of 2020 Arising Out of PS Case No.-539 Year-2019 Thana- MINAPUR District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Ajit Ram, aged about 35 years, Gender-Male, Son of Kishore Ram Resident of Village- Panapur (OP Meenapur), Police Station- Meenapur, DistrictMuzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Raju Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Nagendra Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 02-03-2021 The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

2. Heard Mr. Raju Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Nagendra Prasad, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the State.

3. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Minapur PS Case No. 539 of 2019 dated 17.10.2019, instituted under Sections 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. The allegation against the petitioner, who is the husband of the deceased daughter of the informant, is of killing her and cremating the body without waiting for the informant or his family members.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31942 of 2020 dt.02-03-2021 2/2

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though he is the husband but there was no foul play and postmortem was also conducted.

6. Learned APP submitted that the allegation is that the petitioner and his family members were demanding dowry and due to non-fulfillment, she was killed and the postmortem report reveals that the deceased died due to asphyxia as a result of antemortem pressure over neck, as has been noted by the learned Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur while dismissing the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner on 04.06.2020 in Anticipatory Bail Petition No. 683 of 2020.

7. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) P. Kumar AFR/NAFR U T