Anuj Tati @ Anuj Tanti v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50894 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-92 Year-2021 Thana- SOHSARAI District- Nalanda ====================================================== Anuj Tati @ Anuj Tanti, Son of Chhotelal Tati @ Chhote Tanti, Resident of Village - Singarhat, Devi Sthan, P.S. - Sohsarai, District - Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Raj Kishor Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 27-04-2022 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of four weeks from today.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks regular bail, who is in custody in connection with Sohsarai P.S. Case No. 92 of 2021 for the offence punishable under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code.

As per prosecution case, it is alleged that the marriage of the daughter of the informant was solemnized with Anuj Tanti (petitioner) in the year 2020 and he used to torture and assault his daughter for dowry. It is further alleged that on 20.05.2021, he received information that the petitioner (husband

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50894 of 2021(3) dt.27-04-2022 2/3 of the deceased) killed his daughter by setting her on fire. It is submitted on behalf of learned counsel for the petitioner that the there is general and omnibus allegation against this petitioner and during the course of investigation there is no eye witness to the alleged occurrence and the petitioner is in jail custody since 22.05.2021. It is next submitted that the petitioner is unfortunate husband.

On the other hand, learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the bail application and submits that admittedly the marriage of the victim was solemnized in the year 2020 and the death was caused by burn otherwise than the normal circumstance within a year of her marriage and during course of investigation it has come that soon before her death she was subjected to torture and harassment by the husband in connection with demand of dowry. It is further submitted that during the course of investigation it has come that the deceased was set on fire in a room constructed over the first floor, which was without any roof and the petitioner being husband has failed to give any plausible reason for her death.

Having considered the submissions made on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the fact that petitioner is the husband of the deceased and this occurrence has taken

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50894 of 2021(3) dt.27-04-2022 3/3 place just within a year of the marriage and the deceased was allegedly set on fire in a constructed room over the first floor and moreover there is specific allegation against this petitioner that the deceased was subjected to torture and harassment on account of dowry by the hands of this petitioner, this Court is not persuaded to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected.

It is expected that the learned trial court will take all necessary steps to ensure early disposal of the case. (Harish Kumar, J) uday/- U T