Manjeet Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74098 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-54 Year-2023 Thana- KHODAWANDPUR District- Begusarai ====================================================== MANJEET SAH S/o Madan Sah R/o village- Bajitpur, Ward No.-3, P.S.- Khodawandpur (Chhourahi O.P.), District- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shubhesh Pandey For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh.1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 19-12-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Khodawandpur P.S. Case No. 54 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304B, 201, 34 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Manjhaul, Begusarai.

3. As per the prosecution case, it is allged that the informant's daughter was killed by the petitioner and other coaccused persons due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. The petitioner is the husband of the deceased. He submits that in the postmortem examination the Doctors have not found any mark of violence

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74098 of 2023(3) dt.19-12-2023 2/2 on the body of deceased. He further submits that the Doctors have opined that the death caused by the asphyxia due to hanging. He also submits that in the supervision note the police has found the case true under Section 306 of the I.P.C.. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that within nine months of marriage, the deceased died in her matrimonial home. He further submits that, it is alleged in the F.I.R., the petitioner and other co-accused have killed the informant's daughter and they set the dead body of the deceased on fire, but the informant and the other extinguished the fire and police had taken away the dead body for postmortem.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of case and the nature of the offence and that fact that there is ample evidence against the petitioner in the case diary, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) anand/- U T