Patna High CourtCR. MISC./53269/2023rejected

Azad Chaudhary @ Azad Kumar @ Ajad Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

2023-11-10Mr. Justice Sunil Kumar Panwar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53269 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-252 Year-2022 Thana- KARAHGAR District- Rohtas ====================================================== Azad Chaudhary @ Azad Kumar @ Ajad Chaudhary Son Of Dharichhan Chaudhary Village Rampur Naresh Ps Karagahar, District- Rohtas. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ashwani Kumar Tiwary For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Binod Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 10-11-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in a case instituted for the offence under Sections 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The allegation against the petitioner along with others is of killing the daughter of the informant, due to non-fulfillment of further dowry demand.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He has committed no offence. Petitioner is the husband of the deceased. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner. On the basis of suspicion, petitioner has been implicated in the present case. Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 07.07.2022.

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53269 of 2023(4) dt.10-11-2023 2/2 application for bail and submitted that petitioner is the husband of the deceased and the sole responsibility of taking care of deceased is against her husband/petitioner but he did not do so. From the perusal of the Postmortem report of the deceased, it appears that the cause of death was Asphyxia as a result of strangulation, which corroborates the prosecution case. During investigation several witnesses have also supported the prosecution case.

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

7. The trial Court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Arish/- U T