Chintu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46170 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-70 Year-2022 Thana- MALI District- Aurangabad ====================================================== Chintu Kumar Son Of Baban Singh Resident Of Village -BHURKHURIYA, Ps- Mali, District- Aurangabad ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate Mr. Bhaskar Shankar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 24-08-2023 Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner Sri Krishna Prasad Singh assisted by Sri Bhaskar Shankar and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Mali P.S. Case No. 70 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304(B), 120(B), 201, 34 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad.

3. As per prosecution case, marriage of informant's daughter was solemnized with the petitioner in December, 2021. After some time, she was being ill-treated and tortured by the appellant and his in-laws on demand of dowry and due to demand of dowry, she was killed by her in-laws.

4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46170 of 2023(2) dt.24-08-2023 2/2 that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. Only on suspicion, petitioner has been alleged in the present case. Petitioner is the husband of the deceased.

5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition by submitting that the petitioner is the husband of the deceased and had killed the informant's daughter within seven years of her marriage due to demand of dowry.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of case as also the fact that the petitioner is the husband of the deceased, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) saurabhkrsinha/- U T