Vikransh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63694 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-75 Year-2022 Thana- RIGA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== VIKRANSH KUMAR SON OF KEDAR THAKUR R/O VILLAGESANGRAM FANDEH, P.S.- RIGA, DISTRICT- SITAMARHI ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
SHOBHA DEVI D/O RAM VINAY THAKUR R/O VILLAGE- JAMUA, P.S.- DHAKA, DISTRICT- EAST CHAMPARAN ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Hans Lal Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Parmanand Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 18-04-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 326, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code & Section 3 /4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
As per prosecution case, the informant was married to this petitioner on 29.04.2018 but after marriage the accused persons, including this petitioner, were demanding motorcycle and Rs. 1,00,000/- and on non-fulfillment of the demand, the accused persons sprinkled kerosene oil and set her ablaze on which she received burn injuries.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that allegation of assault and sprinkling
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63694 of 2022(3) dt.18-04-2023 2/2 kerosene oil is general and omnibus in nature. It is next submitted that the occurrence took place on 09.02.2022 but the FIR has been lodged on 05.03.2022 without any explanation for such delay. It is also submitted that the FIR was based on application of the informant and her fard bayan was not recorded in the hospital which creates doubts with regard to varsity of prosecution case. As a matter of fact, the informant got burn injury while cooking food.
Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that petitioner is husband of the informant and there is specific allegation against him that he along with other accused persons sprinkled kerosene oil and set the informant ablaze as a result of which she sustained burn injuries, which as per doctor is 54%. Considering the nature of accusation and gravity of the offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) BKS/- U T