Vijay Pal v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88845 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-211 Year-2023 Thana- ROHTAS District- Rohtas ====================================================== Vijay Pal S/O Rajendra Pal R/O Village- Pakariya, P.S- Akodhigola, Distt.- Rohtas.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 06-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, apprehending his arrest, in connection with Rohtas P.S. Case No. 211 of 2023 dated 16.08.2023, registered for the offences punishable under Section 304(B) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per allegation, the victim was married with the petitioner in the year, 2014 and after the marriage, she joined the matrimonial home of her husband/petitioner herein. However, additional demand of dowry started and on account of nonfulfillment of the same, the petitioner and other family members started torturing the victim. It is further alleged that on 04.08.2023, the victim was badly assaulted by the petitionerhusband and his family members and she was taken to parental

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88845 of 2025(3) dt.06-04-2026 2/3 home where she was getting treatment, but in course of treatment, she died.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that both parents-in-law have got anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court. He further submits that it is not a case of dowry death and the victim has died at her maike in course of treatment.

5. It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the bail petition that the petitioner has not moved this Court earlier either for anticipatory bail or regular one in the instant case.

6. It has further been stated in paragraph no.3 of the bail petition that the petitioner has one criminal antecedent.

7. However, learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the prayer of the Petitioner for bail submitting that the petitioner is the husband of the victim and due to assault by him and his family members, she died in course of treatment. Hence, it is a case of murder rather than dowry death, though it is related with non-fulfillment of illegal demand of dowry. But as per the allegation, there is dying declaration by the petitionerhusband to the informant-brother. Hence, this is not a fit case for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88845 of 2025(3) dt.06-04-2026 3/3 husband of the victim.

8. Considering the fact that as per allegation, the deceased had died on account of assault committed by the petitioner and his family members, I am not persuaded to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

9. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail petition of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

(Jitendra Kumar, J) shoaib/- U T