Pankaj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.518 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-165 Year-2021 Thana- UJIYARPUR District- Samastipur ====================================================== PANKAJ KUMAR S/o Chandeshwar Prasad Mahto R/o village - Raipur, P.S. - Ujiyarpur, Distt. - Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Lakshmindra Kumar Yadav, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Vinod Shanker Modi, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 17-05-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

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 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 03.07.2021, charge-sheet has been submitted and is a person with clean antecedent. The informant alleges that his daughter was married to petitioner on 23.04.2021 and demand of dowry was made on phone with threatening that if dowry will not be given anything can happen. Further, the informant alleges that his daughter was killed for non-fulfillment of dowry demand.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.518 of 2022(2) dt.17-05-2022 2/3 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The informant is not an eyewitness to the occurrence. Learned counsel further submits that though in the FIR it is alleged that dowry was being demanded but FIR is completely silent that what was being demanded in dowry. Learned counsel further submits that it has specifically been pleaded at para 8 of the bail application that the petitioner and the deceased on 09.06.2021 has come from Asansol at 03:00 A.M. and there was altercation took place between the two and the deceased in anger consumed Celphos, accordingly, she was taken to Shree Hospital, Dalsingsarai for treatment after informing her brother on which brother reached and from the said hospital the deceased was referred to Begusarai and on way to Begusarai in ambulance the victim died. Learned counsel next submits that petitioner is implicated merely because he is husband of the deceased.

Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner and submits that the marriage was within seven years, demand of dowry is alleged and even presuming what has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner to be true then it was the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.518 of 2022(2) dt.17-05-2022 3/3 who created conducive conditions for the deceased to take an extreme step and the occurrence also took place in the house of the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner rebuts the submission and submits that altercation between the husband and wife is normal but then in anger if the deceased committed an occurrence the responsibility is not of the petitioner as he had even taken her to hospital for treatment from where she was referred to the higher centre but she died on way to hospital. 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 S.T. No. 292 of 2021 corresponding to Ujiyarpur P.S. Case No. 165 of 2021 pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dalsingsarai, Samastipur/successor Court.

Accordingly, prayer for bail is refused.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T