Patna High CourtCR. MISC./66694/2023dismissed

Kundan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2023-10-16Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66694 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2023 Thana- RAGHOPUR District- Vaishali ====================================================== KUNDAN KUMAR son of Suneshwar Rai @ Suneshwar Ray VillageRustampur Tin Pairiya Ps- Raghopur Rustampur OP Dist- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shivjee Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Narsingh Tanti ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 16-10-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 18.04.2023 in connection with Raghopur (Rustampur O.P.) P.S. Case No. 27 of 2023 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is the husband of the deceased who is said to have brutally killed the deceased. The dead body has been recovered from the river Ganga.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case due to enmity. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that there is delay in lodging the F.I.R. as the occurrence took place on

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66694 of 2023(2) dt.16-10-2023 2/2 02.02.2023 and the present F.I.R. was lodged on 04.02.2023. He further submits that the petitioner never demanded any dowry. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that the petitioner is the husband of the deceased, I am not inclined to grant bail to this petitioner. It, is accordingly rejected.

8. The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.

9. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a patient of Hepatitis 'B', the authorities are directed to get the petitioner properly treated while in custody.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) Saif/- U T