Petitioner, mother-in-law of deceased, challenged bail grant under sections 304B and 34 IPC for dowry death. Court rejected bail prayer due to facts of cruelty and torture allegations.
Prayer for bail rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 1296 of 2015 Sulochana Devi ..... … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .…. … Opposite Party
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA
-----For the Petitioner : Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Satish Kumar Keshri, Advocate --------
The petitioner has been made accused for the offences under Sections 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Dhurwa P.S. Case No. 237 of 2014 corresponding to G.R. No. 6165 of 2014, S.T. No. 42 of 2014.
The petitioner is the mother-in-law of the deceased and there is allegation against her to have subjected the deceased to cruelty and torture for demand of dowry and to have committed her dowry death by burning.
In the facts of this case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner, Sulochana Devi, on bail. Accordingly, her prayer for bail is rejected.
R.Kr.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner accused under Sections 304B and 34 IPC should be granted bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sulochana Devi
The State of Jharkhand
H. C. MISHRA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
