Jitendra Prasad Keshari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.78824 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-127 Year-2018 Thana- BUXAR MUFFSIL District- Buxar ====================================================== Jitendra Prasad Keshari, Son of Hardayal Keshari alias Hardayal Prasad Keshari, Resident of Village- Kulharia, P.S.- Buxar M, District- Buxar. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Binod Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Sri Damodar Prasad Tiwary (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 04-02-2019 Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
Petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in connection with S.Tr. No. 217 of 2018, arising out of Buxar (M) P.S. Case No. 127 of 2018 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A)/304 of the Indian Penal Code. Informant who is father of deceased has alleged that marriage of his daughter was solemnized with the petitioner in the year 2012 in which sufficient gifts and cash were given at the time of marriage. However, after marriage she was being tortured for demand of dowry and for non-fulfillment of which she was killed.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.78824 of 2018(3) dt.04-02-2019 2/2 falsely implicated in this case. The relations between him and his wife was cordial and she committed suicide. From wedlock one daughter is also born who is 5 years old at present. Post mortem was conducted on the dead body of deceased and doctor has opined that she died of burn injuries and smell of kerosene oil was also found. It has been submitted that death was suicidal and not homicidal. Petitioner is in custody since 14.05.2018.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage. Hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.
However, after completing one year of the custody, the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for grant of bail.
(S. Kumar, J) Rajiv/- U T