Rajendra Mahto @ Rajinder Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51380 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-77 Year-2020 Thana- MANJHAGARH District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Rajendra Mahto @ Rajinder Mahto S/o Genna Mahto @ Genu Mahto R/o village- Jhajhwa, P.S.- Manjhagarh, District- Gopalganj ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajesh Ranjan For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Tarun Prasad Mandal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 29-11-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in Manjhagarh P.S. Case No. 77 of 2020, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the prosecution case, all the accused persons including this petitioner committed murder of informant's daughter by throttling her neck due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. Petitioner is husband of the deceased. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. The marriage took place twelve years ago. No such occurrence has ever taken place and there was no demand of dowry by the petitioner. In fact, deceased died due to heart

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51380 of 2021(2) dt.29-11-2021 2/2 disease and due to poverty petitioner could not provide her better medical treatment. There is general and omnibus allegation. Petitioner is in custody since 22.03.2021 having no criminal antecedent.

Learned APP however, vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is specific and direct allegation against this petitioner of demand of dowry. Considering the facts aforesaid and the nature of allegation and the fact that petitioner is husband of the deceased, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) vinita/- U T