Munna Kumar @ Munna Yadav @ Munna Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1006 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-424 Year-2022 Thana- SANGRAMPUR District- East Champaran ====================================================== MUNNA KUMAR @ MUNNA YADAV @ MUNNA KUMAR YADAV S/o JAGDISH YADAV @ JAGDISH RAI R/o village- Maharani Pandohi, Police Station- Mohammadpur, District- Gopalganj.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajesh Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Akbar Ali, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 19-03-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Sangrampur P.S. Case no.424 of 2022, registered under sections 304B, 120B and 201 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states that his daughter was married to the petitioner herein in the year 2014. Subsequently, she was tortured for non-fulfillment of the demand of dowry by way of motorcycle and ultimately was done to death and her dead body made to disappear.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. The allegations are false and concocted. The petitioner and the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1006 of 2024(3) dt.19-03-2024 2/2 daughter of the informant were living a happy conjugal life and had three children including two sons and a daughter out of the said wedlock. It was after having participated in the last rites that much subsequently the petitioner was falsely implicated in the case in the complaint filed which was subsequently registered as an FIR. The death being a natural death, cremation was carried out with the informant participating in the same. The petitioner is in custody since 11.9.2023 and charge-sheet has been submitted in the case.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations in the FIR, the material that has transpired in course of investigation and the petitioner being the husband of the deceased, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.

7. Learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. (Partha Sarthy, J) Shiv/- U T