Badal Sah @ Badal Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65535 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-481 Year-2021 Thana- BEGUSARAI TOWN District- Begusarai ====================================================== Badal Sah @ Badal Kumar Son of Ajay Sah @ Ajit Sah Resident of VillageBaghi, Ward No.-11, P.S.- Town, District- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sandip Kumar Gautam, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Pawan Kumar Chaurasia, APP For the Informant : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 26-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of four weeks from today.

3. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 28.06.2022 in connection with Town P.S. Case No. 481 of 2021, F.I.R. dated 01.08.2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 304(B)/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3⁄4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

4. According to prosecution case, all the accused persons including this petitioner have killed the daughter of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65535 of 2022(6) dt.26-07-2023 2/2 informant due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case merely on the ground that the petitioner is husband of the deceased. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R.

6. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that without the postmortem report, the petitioner and his family members have disposed of the dead body of the deceased.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Town P.S. Case No. 481 of 2021 pending in the court of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai.

8. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T