Rishi Paswan @ Rishi Kumar Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3921 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-139 Year-2019 Thana- SAKRI District- Madhubani ====================================================== RISHI PASWAN @ RISHI KUMAR PASWAN Son of BHUTERI PASWAN Resident of Village - Kanakpur (Paswan Tol), P.S. - Sakri, District - Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Kripa Nand Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.B.N.Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 03-06-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State through virtual court proceeding. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sakri P.S. Case No.139 of 2019, corresponding to G.R. No.1550 of 2019, registered for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the prosecution case, the marriage of informant's daughter was solemnized in the year 2016 and after one year of marriage, her in-laws started demanding dowry and on nonfulfillment of the same, she was assaulted. Panchayati was also held where the accused persons agreed to not assault in future but on 19.08.2019, the informant received a call that her daughter has ran down from a train after being assaulted and provoked.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3921 of 2021(3) dt.03-06-2021 2/2 petitioner being the husband has been falsely implicated in this case and has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. He is quite innocent as this was an unfortunate train accident occurred when the victim was crossing the railway track. They never demanded any dowry nor any panchayati was held. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. Chargesheet has been submitted in this case. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent and has been languishing in custody since 16.03.2020. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the bail petition by submitting that petitioner is the husband of the deceased and from perusal of the case diary, it appears that some of the witnesses have supported the prosecution case, as such, privilege of bail may not be granted to him.

Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

Accordingly, prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected with a liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.

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