Amit Kumar Rajak v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48827 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-202 Year-2020 Thana- KHAIRA District- Jamui ====================================================== Amit Kumar Rajak S/o Rajendra Rajak R/o vill - Tihiya, P.S.- Khaira, Distt.- Jamui ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Niranjan Parihar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ganesh Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 12-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. A prayer for bail has been made on behalf of the petitioner in connection with Khaira P.S. Case no.202 of 2020 registered under sections 304B, 201, 120B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Allegation in the F.I.R is that the petitioner killed his wife on nonfulfillment of demand of dowry.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been implicated in the case only for the reason that he happens to be the husband of the deceased. As a matter of fact, the petitioner was married to the deceased for the past five years and there was never any demand of dowry or torture and no complaint was ever filed in this regard earlier. It is further submitted that during corona period the deceased had died on account of electric shock, which has been converted into the present case by the uncle of the deceased to want of dowry

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48827 of 2025(6) dt.12-02-2026 2/2 for oblique motive. The petitioner is in custody since 28.02.2025 and no substantial progress has been made in the case. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent and undertakes to cooperate in the case/trial.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State on the ground that petitioner is mainly responsible for the death of the deceased.

6. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that petitioner is the husband of the deceased, who is responsible for welfare of his wife coupled with the fact that the case is of the year 2020 and delay has already been caused in surrender of the petitioner in the year 2025 keeping the case pending since long, coupled with the fact that report with regard to stage of the case also indicates that the case was reached for commitment to the Court of Sessions, the Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage and the application is rejected. (Soni Shrivastava, J) Harsh/- U T