Patna High CourtCR. MISC./74975/2024bail rejected

Rampravesh Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

2025-02-05Mr. Justice Dr. Anshuman2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74975 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-59 Year-2023 Thana- VISHAMBHARPUR District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Rampravesh Mahto S/o Jokhu Mahto R/O Village- Matihaniyan salehpur, PSBishambharpur, Dist- Gopalganj ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Adarsh Ranjan, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 05-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Bishambharpur P.S. Case No.59 of 2023 lodged under Sections 304B, 201/34 of the I.P.C. read with Section 3/4 of the D.P. Act and police submitted Charge sheet under section 304B, 302, 201/34 of the I.P.C.

3. As per the prosecution case, the F.I.R. has been lodged against the three named accused persons including the petitioner against whom there is allegation of dowry demand and upon non-fulfillment of the said demand, the accused persons have killed the informant's daughter.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He submits

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74975 of 2024(3) dt.05-02-2025 2/2 that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and there is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner.

5. Counsel further submits that petitioner is in custody since 20.04.2023 having clean antecedent. He further submits that the petitioner is a husband of the deceased and offence under section 304B of the I.P.C. has been alleged against the petitioner.

6. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and the petitioner is a husband of the deceased.

7. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Therefore, the bail application of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.) Prakashmani/- U T