Patna High CourtCR. MISC./48730/2016rejected

Ramadhin Raut v. The State Of Bihar

2017-01-30Mr. Justice Arvind Srivastava2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.48730 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -164 Year- 2016 Thana -BIHARSHARIF District- NALANDA (BIHARSHARIFF) ======================================================

1. Ramadhin Raut S/o Mukhiya Ji R/o Village Murauradih, P.S. Bihar, District Nalanda.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mrigendra Pratap Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 30-01-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

Petitioner seeks bail in connection with Bihar P.S. Case No. 164 of 2016 registered under Sections- 323, 341, 324, 506, 302, 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The allegation against the petitioner, who is husband of the daughter of the informant, is of torturing and assaulting the deceased. Ultimately, the deceased was burnt to death by the petitioner and other in-laws. It is further alleged that petitioner has illicit relation with his Bhaujai. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a dumb, mentally upset person and has been falsely implicated in this case. During examination, witnesses have

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.48730 of 2016 (3) dt.30-01-2017 2/2 stated that the deceased committed suicide. It is further submitted that the deceased herself did not want to live with the petitioner as the petitioner is a dumb man.

Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that there is direct allegation against the petitioner.

Considering the nature of allegations levelled against the petitioner and the submissions, I do not feel inclined to grant the privilege of bail to the petitioner. His prayer for bail is, accordingly, rejected.

However, petitioner may renew his prayer for bail on framing of the charge.

(Arvind Srivastava, J) Manish/- U T