Md. Musahid @ Musahid v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.586 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-124 Year-2019 Thana- PALASI District- Araria ====================================================== MD. MUSAHID @ MUSAHID S/o- Hasibur Rahman @ Md. Hasibur Rahman Resident of Village- Blesari (Hatgaon), P.S.- Palasi, District- Araira. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Manish Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 16-01-2020 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Palasi PS case no. 124 of 2019 instituted for the offences punishable under Section 304(B)/34 of Indian Penal Code. The case of the prosecution in brief is that the daughter of the informant namely Suhana Perween had solemnized marriage with the petitioner herein as per the Muslim rites and customs and after the daughter of the informant had gone to her matrimonial home, the accused persons including the petitioner herein, who happens to be the husband of the daughter of the informant, had started harassing and torturing the daughter of the informant on account of non-fulfilment of the demand for dowry to the tune of Rs. 2 lacs. It is further alleged that the accused persons had

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.586 of 2020(2) dt.16-01-2020 2/2 thereafter killed the deceased victim lady on account of non-fulfilment of the demand for dowry by assaulting her and strangulating her by tying rope around her neck. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent, is having a clean antecedent and is languishing in custody since 06.11.2019. I have heard and considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and I find that there is clear allegation of the accused persons including the petitioner herein who is the husband of the deceased, of having killed the deceased victim lady on account of non-fulfiment of the demand for dowry. The complicity of the petitioner cannot be ruled out since he happens to be the main accused in the present case.

Considering the grievous nature of allegation leveled against the petitioner as also considering the seriousness of the accusation, I find that no case is made out qua the petitioner herein for the purposes of grant of regular bail, as such, the present petition stands dismissed.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) rinkee/- U T