Patna High CourtCR. MISC./79090/2024rejected

Chhotu Kumar Paswan @ Chhotu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2025-01-10Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79090 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-283 Year-2023 Thana- GORAUL District- Vaishali ====================================================== Chhotu Kumar Paswan @ Chhotu Kumar Son of Yogendra Paswan Resident of Village- Katermala PS- Goraul District- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ram Shankar Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 10-01-2025 Heard Mr.Ram Shankar Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Dr. Ajeet Kumar, learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 22.04.2024 in connection with Goraul P.S. Case No. 283 of 2023, F.I.R. dated 01.07.2023 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 3/4 of D.P.Act.

3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he alongwith other co-accused persons have in furtherance of their common intention committed the dowry death of the daughter of the informant.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent. He has falsely

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79090 of 2024(3) dt.10-01-2025 2/2 been implicated in the present case merely on the ground that the petitioner is husband of the deceased. The allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR and from a bare perusal of the FIR it appears that there is no specific allegation of any assault, overt-act or demand of dowry attributed against the petitioner rather there is general and omnibus allegation against all the accused persons including the petitioner.

5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner is husband of the deceased.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Goraul P.S. Case No. 283 of 2023 pending in the court of learned A.C.J.M., Vaishali at Hajipur.

7. Prayer is refused.

8. However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge, if so advised.

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