Patna High CourtCR. MISC./1332/2024bail granted

Dilip Pandit @ Dilip Kumar Pandit v. The State Of Bihar

2024-03-21Mr. Justice Partha Sarthy3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1332 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-289 Year-2022 Thana- DARAUNDA District- Siwan ====================================================== Dilip Pandit @ Dilip Kumar Pandit, Son of Late Ramdeo Pandit, Resident of Village- Dibbi, Pakri, P.S.- M.H. Nagar, District- Siwan ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Sinha, Advocate Mr. Kumar Sinha, Advocate Mr. Shashi Shekhar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Mohammad Sufyan, APP Mr. Rajni Kant Singh, Advocate Mr. Prabhakar Singh, Advocate Ms. Rana Neha Kumari, Advocate Mr. Rakesh Mohan Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 21-03-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Daraunda (M.H. Nagar) P.S. Case no. 289 of 2022, registered under sections 304B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the sister of the informant was married to the son of the petitioner herein. She was tortured for non-fulfillment of the demand of dowry to the tune of Rs.75,000/- in cash and was ultimately killed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1332 of 2024(3) dt.21-03-2024 2/3 petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case only for the reason that he happens to be the father-in-law of the deceased. The allegations are general and omnibus in nature. There is no eye witness to the occurrence. The husband of the deceased is in custody. The petitioner is in custody since 4.9.2023 and undertakes to cooperate in the trial.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant. Learned counsel for the informant in reference to the FIR submits that it was at the time of dwar pooja itself that the petitioner herein started to make demand of Rs.75,000/- and on non-payment of the same made a scene. The non-fulfillment of this demand led to the murder of the informant's sister by the accused persons including the petitioner herein, who happens to be the head of the family.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations in the F.I.R against the petitioner, his being in custody since 4.9.2023, not having any criminal antecedent and the husband of the deceased being in custody, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Daraunda (M.H. Nagar) P.S. Case no. 289 of 2022, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1332 of 2024(3) dt.21-03-2024 3/3 Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Siwan on the following conditions:

(I) The petitioner shall remain physically present and properly represented in the trial court on each date of the case/trial and shall cooperate in the trial.

(II) In case, the learned trial Court is of the opinion that the trial is being delayed due to non-cooperation on part of the petitioner, the learned trial Court may cancel the bail bond of the petitioner and take him into custody till conclusion of the trial.

(Partha Sarthy, J) avinash/- U T