Vindeshwar Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.57070 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -84 Year- 2015 Thana -LALIT NARAYAN UNIVERSITY DistrictDARBHANGA ======================================================

1. VINDESHWAR MAHTO Son of Late Garbhu Mahto, Resident of Mohalla- Alinagar Gopal Sah Pokhar, Ward No. 1, P.S.- L.N.M.U. Campus, District- Darbhanga .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kumar Rajeev For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Meena Singh(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 20-06-2016 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case for the offences punishable under sections 304 (B) and 34 of the I.P.C Reeta Devi, the cousin sister of the informant, was married to Vijay Mahto, the son of the petitioner, and allegedly due to non fulfillment of demand of dowry by way of motorcycle and cash of Rs. 50,000/- she was being tortured and ultimately she was burnt to death and her dead body was also cremated by the petitioner and other in-laws including the husband. Submission is of false implication and that the petitioner is an old father-in-law of the deceased, there is no specific allegation against him, the death was accidental one and

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.57070 of 2015 (4) dt.20-06-2016 2/2 after getting the knowledge of real fact the informant has filed compromise petition in the court below, the petitioner along with his family members brought the injured to D.M.C.H to save her life and thereafter she was brought to P.M.C.H. for better treatment but during course of treatment she died. The learned A.P.P. fairly submits that the petitioner is the father-in-law.

In the facts and circumstances as stated above, considering that charge sheet has already been submitted and there is no chance of tampering with the prosecution evidence and as such the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of C.J.M. Darbhanga in L.N.M.U. Campus P.S. Case No. 84 of 2015, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be a near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) Abhay/- U T