Md. Shaukat Ali @ Md. Shaukat @ Shaukat Ali v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42555 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-360 Year-2020 Thana- JAYNAGAR District- Madhubani ====================================================== Md. Shaukat Ali @ Md. Shaukat @ Shaukat Ali Son of Md. Nizamuddin, Resident of Village- Dullipatti, Muslim Tole, P.S.- Jainagar, District - Madhubani.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Yugesh Chandra Verma, Sr. Adv.
: Mr. Iqbal Asif Niazi, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Tarun Prasad Mandal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 06-12-2022 Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within two weeks from today.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Jainagar P.S. Case No. 360 of 2020 lodged under Sections 304(B)/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
As per the F.I.R., the informant has disclosed that marriage of his daughter was solemnized with the petitioner on 11th April, 2016. His daughter became mother in the year 2018. The allegation of assault is upon the petitioner. It has been alleged that there was demand of Rs. 4 lacs for the purpose of purchasing house in Delhi is against the petitioner. On
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42555 of 2022(2) dt.06-12-2022 2/3 05.10.2020 the informant received information that his daughter became injured and was sent to Jainagar Sadar Hospital for treatment, when informant reached there he received information that his daughter has died due to suicide by strangulation. Some of the villagers told that death has caused due to head injury.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Learned counsel also submits that the conjugal life was extremely happy and petitioner was working at Delhi from where he used to come and go to meet with his wife and from their marital life they have one child also. Learned counsel further submits that at the time of said occurrence petitioner was not present rather he was at Delhi, but the family members have immediately intimated about this event to his father-in-law. Learned counsel also submits that petitioner has attached the plane ticket by which he came from Delhi to Patna and about every development he has intimated time to time to his father-in-law. Learned counsel further submits that it is a case of unfortunate event that took place in petitioner's life and being the husband, he is responsible under Section 304-B of the I.P.C. Learned counsel also submits that it is the in-law's family of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42555 of 2022(2) dt.06-12-2022 3/3 petitioner who brought the deceased to hospital and provided the best treatment to her but unfortunately she died. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner is in custody since 07.03.2022 and his antecedent is clean. Learned counsel also submits that family members of petitioner have already been granted anticipatory bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court (Annexure-3).
Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that ultimate responsibility is upon the husband to look after his wife but he has failed to do so. In the present facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, therefore, his bail petition is hereby rejected but liberty is hereby granted to the petitioner that he may renew his prayer for bail just after framing of charge and Trial Court is directed to release him on bail imposing its own conditions so that he may not evade his appearance during trial. (Dr. Anshuman, J.) ravishankar/- U T