Baiju Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84608 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-495 Year-2023 Thana- MADHUBAN District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.

Baiju Ram Son of Baldeo Ram Resident of Village - Dihu Tola Bhadohi, P.S. - Madhuban, District - East Champaran 2.

Sonarpati Devi Wife of Baiju Ram Resident of Village - Dihu Tola Bhadohi, P.S. - Madhuban, District - East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Anant Kumar 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 24-01-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioners seek bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 304-B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. It is a case of dowry death.

4. As per prosecution case, informant solemnized the marriage of his daughter with co-accused Vijay Ram. After marriage, the husband and in laws of informant's daughter started demanding Rs. 2,00,000/- as dowry. Due to nonfulfillment of the same, she was tortured and ill treated. It is further alleged that on 06.10.2023, all the F.I.R. named accused persons including these petitioners committed murder of informant's daughter.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84608 of 2024(2) dt.24-01-2025 2/2

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case. Further submission is that petitioners are father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased respectively. Petitioners are victims of over implications. They are separate in mess and property and have never tortured the deceased nor demanded any dowry. Thrust of accusation is against husband of the deceased, who is already in custody. Petitioners have got no criminal antecedent and they are in custody since 04.09.2024.

5. Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State opposed the prayer for bail.

6. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of custody, let the above named petitioners be released on bail on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Sadar, Motihari, East Champaran, in connection with Madhuban P.S. Case No. 495 of 2023.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) utkarsh/- U T