Raghunath Paswan @ Karku Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72055 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-97 Year-2021 Thana- BAUSI District- Araria ====================================================== RAGHUNATH PASWAN @ KARKU PASWAN S/o Lakhan Paswan Resident of Village - Uphrail, P.S.- Bounsi, District- Araria. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anil Prasad Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Suman Kumari Singh, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 13-05-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State through virtual Court proceedings. Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within a period of four weeks after complete start of the physical Court. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The informant alleges that his daughter was married to the petitioner and was blessed with children. Further, the petitioner performed second marriage with Aarti Devi who had one son from the wedlock. Further, on 16.08.2021, Aarti Devi and her mother sprinkled kerosene oil on the daughter of the informant and set the victim ablaze who died during the course of treatment on 31.08.2021.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72055 of 2021(2) dt.13-05-2022 2/2 petitioner is in custody since 04.09.2021, charge-sheet has been submitted and is a person with clean antecedent. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that petitioner is the husband of the deceased and the specific allegation of sprinkling kerosene oil is on Aarti Devi and her mother based on which petitioner's first wife died. It is, thus, submitted that in the FIR petitioner is not alleged to have committed the occurrence. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner performed his second marriage of which the occurrence took place, as such, it cannot be asked that the petitioner was not responsible for the occurrence. Considering the submissions made by the learned A.P.P., the Court for the present is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner in connection with Bausi P.S. Case No. 97 of 2021 pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Araria/successor Court.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T