Patna High CourtCR. MISC./53745/2021bail rejected

Binod Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2021-12-03Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53745 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-344 Year-2020 Thana- SASARAM NAGAR District- Rohtas ====================================================== Binod Singh S/o Ramashish Singh R/o Mohalla- Pathan Toli, P.S.- Sasaram (Nagar), District- Rohtas at Sasaram ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Babu Nandan Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Aditya Narayan Singh.1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 03-12-2021 This matter is taken up for consideration through Video Conferencing.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in Sasaram Nagar P.S. Case No. 344 of 2020, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 498(A), 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

As per the prosecution case, this petitioner along with other accused persons committed torture and killed the daughter of informant by pressing her neck due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. Petitioner is husband of the deceased. The marriage took place in the year 2009.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53745 of 2021(2) dt.03-12-2021 2/2 petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. No such occurrence has ever taken place and there was no demand of dowry by the petitioner. In fact, deceased died due to illness. There is general and omnibus allegation. Petitioner is in custody since 19.06.2020 having no criminal antecedent. Counsel for the Informant, vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is specific and direct allegation against this petitioner of committing torture and murder. Inquest report and postmortem report support the prosecution case. The doctor has found 03 external injuries on the person of deceased.

Considering the facts aforesaid and the nature of allegation and the fact that petitioner is husband of the deceased and deceased died in unnatural circumstance at her matrimonial home, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

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