Shailendra Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38325 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-78 Year-2018 Thana- JANKINAGAR District- Purnia ====================================================== Shailendra Ram aged about 30 years Son of Abhinandan Ram Resident of Village- Shila Nath Rupouli, P.S.- Janki Nagar, District- Purnea. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ram Prawesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Naresh Ray ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 11-09-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner who is in custody since 04.06.2018 has filed the instant application for grant of bail in connection with Janki Nagar P.S. Case No. 78 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 304B and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the allegation in the FIR, the deceased sister of informant who was married to this petitioner in the year 2016 was burnt by the petitioner for non-fulfillment of the demand of dowry by way of a motorcycle.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the allegation as made in the F.I.R. are false and concocted. The wife of this petitioner got burn injury in an accident and in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38325 of 2019(3) dt.11-09-2019 2/2 an attempt to put out the fire the petitioner-husband also sustained burn injury which would be evident from the F.I.R. itself. It is further submitted that there is no eye witness to the occurrence. The petitioner is in custody since 04.06.2018 and has clean antecedent.

The application for bail was opposed by learned APP for the State. He submits that although it is true that the petitioner sustained burn injuries but from the F.I.R. itself it has transpired that the witnesses had disclosed that the injury was sustained by the petitioner in the act of burning the sister of the informant.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner happens to be the husband of the deceased and there is direct allegation against him, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and as such the petitioner's application for bail is rejected.

(Partha Sarthy, J) Bibhash/- U T