Patna High CourtCR. MISC./42435/2024partly allowed disposal

Hareram Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

2024-10-23Mr. Justice R. P. Mishra3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42435 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-130 Year-2023 Thana- TIKAPATTI District- Purnia ====================================================== 1.

HARERAM MAHTO SON OF LATE SHIVANAND MAHTO VILLAGEGORIYAR PASHICHAM, P.S.- TIKKAPATTI, DISTT.- PURNIA 2.

MOST RAJ KUMARI DEVI W/O- LATE SHIVANAND MAHTO VILLAGE- GORIYAR PASHICHAM, P.S.- TIKKAPATTI, DISTT.- PURNIA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Raghvendra Kumar Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 23-10-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned APP for the State, learned counsel for the informant and perused the case diary.

2. The petitioners seek bail in connection with Tikkapatti P.S. Case No. 130 of 2023 instituted for the offences under Sections 304B, 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Prosecution story, in short, is that the petitioners along with other family members have killed the deceased for non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42435 of 2024(3) dt.23-10-2024 2/3 Petitioner no.1 is the husband and petitioner no.2 is the motherin-law of the deceased. There is general and omnibus allegation against these petitioners. Learned counsel further submitted that there is no specific allegation of demand of dowry from these petitioners. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners are in custody since 31.12.2023 and have no criminal antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioners. Learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the informant jointly submitted that the accused petitioner have committed the murder of the deceased by strangulating her and this fact is also supported by the postmortem report of the deceased.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, and the period of custody undergone by the petitioners, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner no. 1 as he is the husband of the deceased. However, so far as petitioner no.2 is concerned, since she is a lady aged about 55 years, this Court is inclined to grant bail to her.

7. Accordingly, Let the petitioner no. 2, namely, Most. Raj Kumari Devi, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42435 of 2024(3) dt.23-10-2024 3/3 of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Tikkapatti P.S. Case No. 130 of 2023.

8. However, the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner no. 1, namely, Hare Ram Mahto is rejected.

9. Learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Alok Verma/- U T