Patna High CourtCR. MISC./57935/2018dismissed

Dharmendra Sah @ Dharmendra v. The State Of Bihar

2018-09-28Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.57935 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -84 Year- 2018 Thana -GOPALGANJ TOWN District- GOPALGANJ ======================================================

1. Dharmendra Sah @ Dharmendra son of Raj Kumar Sah @ Raju Sah, resident of Village- Nawada More (Nawada Khas), Police StationGopalganj Town, District- Gopalganj. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Lokesh Kumar Singh,Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Md. Fahimuddin,A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 28-09-2018 Heard the parties. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Gopalganj Town P.S.Case No. 84 of 2018, registered for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 326, 307, 504, 506/34, 304 (B) and 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per F.I.R., allegation against the petitioner, who is husband of the deceased, is that the petitioner has caught the hair of the deceased and assaulted with fists and slaps and on the order of the petitioner, co-accused, Praduman bring kerosene oil and poured on the body of the informant and thereafter, her motherin-law set her on fire. It is also alleged that during course of treatment after the death of victim, Sections 304 (B) and 302 of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.57935 of 2018 (2) dt.28-09-2018 2/2 the Indian Penal Code has been added.

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case only on the basis of suspicion and thereafter the other allegation of setting on fire of the deceased, the petitioner had taken her in hospital for treatment and during treatment, she died he is in custody since 15.05.2018.

Heard learned A.P.P. also who opposed the prayed for bail.

Having heard both sides and in view of the facts and circumstances, as stated above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

With the aforesaid observation, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) Sudha/- U