Rabindra Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8252 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-160 Year-2020 Thana- HISUWA District- Nawada ====================================================== Rabindra Yadav, son of Ramashish Prasad Yadav @ Ramashish Yadav, resident of Village- Ranipur, P.S- Hisua, Distt- Nawada. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Akhileshwar Dayal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 13-12-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Akhileshwar Dayal, learned APP for the State. The petitioner, in the present case, is seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Hisua P.S. Case No. 160 of 2020 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304(B), 120(B), 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code. He has no criminal antecedent as stated in paragraph '3' of the application.

As per the prosecution story, the informant has alleged that his sister was married with the petitioner in the year 2017, thereafter all the accused persons started torturing her and demanded Rupees One Lakh in cash and motorcycle in dowry. It is further alleged that the informant along with his family had gone to her sister's sasural to intervene in the matter. On 22.05.2020 at night all the accused persons killed the sister of the informant and cremated her dead body without the knowledge of the informant. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8252 of 2021(2) dt.13-12-2021 2/2 petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that petitioner was ill and was treated in hospital and after discharge from hospital she became serious in the night but in the way of the hospital she died.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for pre-arrest bail of the petitioner.

Having regard to the submissions before this court showing that a young lady who happened to be the wife of this petitioner died within the four corners of the matrimonial house within three years of her marriage and no plausible explanation to the reason thereof is coming before this court, considering that the petitioner is the husband of the deceased and the occurrence has taken place within his premises which he is unable to explain, this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.

Prayer for pre-arrest bail of the petitioner is, thus, refused.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Rajeev/- U T Note: The ordersheet duly signed has been attached with the record. However, in view of the present arrangements, during Pandemic period all concerned shall act on the basis of the copy of the order uploaded on the High Court website under the heading 'Judicial Orders Passed During The Pandemic Period'.