Patna High CourtCR. MISC./50830/2019rejected

Raju Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

2019-08-17Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50830 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-343 Year-2018 Thana- SAKRA District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== RAJU PASWAN S/o- Late Shankar Paswan Resident of Village- Rajapur (Dubaha), P.S.- Sakra, District- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sunil Kumar Pandey For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Yogendra Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 17-08-2019 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Sakra P.S. Case No.343 of 2018 registered under Sections 304B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The father of the deceased alleged that his daughter was married with the petitioner five years ago but the petitioner and his family members subjected his daughter to different sorts of torture due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. The accused persons including the petitioner killed his daughter by brutally assaulting and strangulating her.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is of course husband of the deceased but petitioner never demanded any dowry nor tortured his wife. The deceased slipped in the bathroom and sustained head injury which

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50830 of 2019(2) dt.17-08-2019 2/2 resulted in her death but post-mortem report shows that deceased got many injuries on head and other parts of her body and on account of which she died.

Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid and nature of allegation made against the petitioner that the petitioner subjected his wife to different sorts of torture and killed her by assaulting and strangulating and the fact that petitioner is husband of the deceased, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Saurabh/- U T