Mahendra Rajak v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6628 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-24 Year-2020 Thana- BIRUPUR SAHAYAK DistrictLakhisarai ====================================================== MAHENDRA RAJAK S/O Shiv Shankar Rajak R/o- Repura, P.S. - Birupur, District - Lakhisarai.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 12-07-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State through video conferencing. The petitioner has filed the instant application for grant of regular bail in connection with Birupur Sahayak P.S. Case no. 24 of 2020 registered under sections 304B, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per allegation in the FIR, it is stated by the informant that he married his daughter to the son of the petitioner herein. The accused persons including the petitioner herein continued to torture his daughter for non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. She was abused and threatened that she would be killed. The informant states that he learnt that his daughter was burnt to death by the accused persons and thereafter her body was disposed off in the river by placing the same in a sack.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the allegations as levelled in the FIR are false and concocted. He is the father-in-law of the deceased and is living

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6628 of 2021(4) dt.12-07-2021 2/2 separately from his son. The allegations are general and omnibus in nature and there is no eye-witness to the occurrence. The allegations of demand of dowry are false and concocted. He is in custody since 5.6.2020 and has no criminal antecedent. On a query being made with respect to the whereabouts of the husband of the deceased, it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that his application for grant of anticipatory bail is still pending.

The application for bail is opposed by learned counsel for the State.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations against the petitioner in the FIR, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.

(Partha Sarthy, J) Prakash/- U