Pawan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9554 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-150 Year-2020 Thana- RAFIGANJ District- Aurangabad ====================================================== Pawan Kumar S/O- Ramsrup Das R/O Village- Gordiha, P.S-Rafiganj, District-Aurangabad (BIHAR) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bhaskar Shankar For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Asha Devi, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 31-08-2021 This matter is taken up for consideration through Video Conferencing.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in Rafiganj P.S. Case No. 150 of 2020, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the prosecution case, marriage of informant's sister was solemnized with petitioner in the year 2017. After marriage, petitioner and his family members started demanding dowry and subjected her to torture and harassment. It is further alleged that the accused persons committed murder of informant's sister by setting her on fire due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. Petitioner is husband of the deceased.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9554 of 2021(3) dt.31-08-2021 2/2 It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. No such occurrence has ever taken place and there was no demand of dowry by the petitioner. In fact, deceased went to cook food, but due to leakage of gas she caught fire and on alarm petitioner came and tried to defuse the flame and in course of same his palm got burnt. There is general and omnibus allegation. Petitioner is in custody since 22.07.2020 having no criminal antecedent.

Learned APP however, vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

Considering the facts aforesaid and the nature of allegation and the fact that petitioner is husband of the deceased and deceased died in unnatural circumstance within seven years of her marriage, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) vinita/- U T