Ravi Shastri v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65767 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-346 Year-2023 Thana- SUPAUL District- Supaul ====================================================== Ravi Shastri Son Of Hari Paswan Resident Of Hisua Nauwabaghi, Ps- Hisua District- Nawada At Present Residing At Koshi Colony Ward No. 21, Ps And Distt- Supaul ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bhaskar Shankar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Sumiran Rai ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 05-01-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Supaul P.S. Case No. 346 of 2023 instituted for the offence under Sections 302, 304(B), 120(B) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. As per FIR the prosecution case, in brief, is that the informant's daughter (deceased) got married with the petitioner on 10.12.2018 but soon after the marriage petitioner along with his family members has tortured in various ways to the daughter of the informant due to non-fulfillment dowry demand and ultimately on 11.05.2023, the informant came to know that her daughter has been killed by the accused persons.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this present case merely on suspicion. There is no prior complain in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65767 of 2023(3) dt.05-01-2024 2/2 respect of torture, harassment and assault against the petitioner. It is further submitted in para 9 of the petition that on the day of occurrence i.e. 10.05.2023 the petitioner was present at Patna High Court where he sworn affidavit on behalf of Respondent No.4 in L.P.A. No. 3 of 2021. Moreover, he is languishing in judicial custody since 13.05.2023.

Learned APP appearing for the state has opposed the prayer of regular bail and submitted that petitioner is husband of the deceased and he must be responsible to keep his wife with proper behavior and dignity but he did not do so. During course of investigation, witnesses of this case have also supported the prosecution case and the postmortem report also suggests that the cause of death is cardio-respiratory failure due to Asphyxia caused by strangulation.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as soon as possible.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) lata/- U T