Ramu Mandal v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32713 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-138 Year-2018 Thana- BELA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== RAMU MANDAL Son of Rupnarayan Mandal @ Sakur Mandal Resident of Village - Nocha, P.S. - Bela, Dist. - Sitamarhi. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 19-01-2021 Heard Mr. Alok Kumar Alok, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State.

Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Bela P.S. Case No. 138 of 2018 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code 1860. The allegation as per the First Information Report is that the daughter of the informant was married to the petitioner about 5-6 months back and just after the marriage, the petitioner along with his other family members started demanding Motorcycle by way of dowry and due to non-fulfillment of the demand, the daughter of the informant has been burnt to death. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence in the manner alleged

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32713 of 2020(3) dt.19-01-2021 2/3 and he has falsely been implicated in this case merely on the basis of the fact that he happens to be the husband of the deceased. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is working in Asansol and on the date of occurrence he was not present in the village. This fact has been corroborated in the statement of independent witnesses recorded during course of investigation in paragraphs 69 and 70 of the case diary. Learned counsel also submits that the deceased locked herself in a room and committed suicide by burning herself. Learned counsel next submits that this fact has been stated by the witnesses residing near the house of the deceased.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that there is specific allegation of demand of dowry against the petitioner and the informant has specifically stated in the First Information Report that just ten days before, he had gone to meet his daughter and his daughter had informed him that the co-accused persons were pressurizing her i.e. deceased to bring Motorcycle, otherwise, she would be killed and just after 5-6 months of the marriage, the deceased died in her matrimonial home in suspicious circumstances. Learned counsel further submits that there is presumption under Section 113B of the Evidence Act against the petitioner and others.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32713 of 2020(3) dt.19-01-2021 3/3 Having regard to the submissions made by the parties and taking into consideration the materials on record, the nature of allegation in totality and the fact that within 5-6 months of the marriage, the deceased has died in her matrimonial home, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner at this stage.

Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected.

However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after nine months if the trial does not show any progress. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J) S.Ali/- U T