Bishundev Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78105 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-161 Year-2019 Thana- PAKARIBARAW District- Nawada ====================================================== BISHUNDEV MAHTO Son of Late Mahabir Mahto Resident of VillageDhevedha @ Dheodha, P.S.- Pakribarawan, District- Nawada. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shyam Bihari Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Kumar Ranjit Ranjan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 20-12-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 19.08.2019 in connection with Pakriwarawan P.S.Case No. 161 of 2019 for the alleged offences under Sections 323, 304(B), 201 and 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated merely because he happens to be father-in-law of the deceased. It is submitted that the accusation of demand for dowry and inflicting torture are general and omnibus against all the accused persons and no specific overt act has been attributed to the petitioner. It is stated that the petitioner had been residing separately from the deceased and her husband and had no concern with their day-to-day matters. The husband of the deceased is in custody since 31.08.2019. After due investigation, the police has submitted charge sheet under Sections 302 and 201/34 IPC. The petitioner claims clean antecedents.

4. Be that as it may, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78105 of 2019(2) dt.20-12-2019 2/2 satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Nawada in connection with Pakriwarawan P.S.Case No. 161 of 2019, on the following conditions-- (i) That one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioner.

(ii) That the petitioner shall not indulge in any similar offence till conclusion of the trial.

(iii) That the petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation, if not already concluded, and make himself available as and when so required and in case of failure, the State shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail. (iv) The petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned Court concerned.

(Vikash Jain, J) HR/- U T