The Patna High Court rejected the bail application of a husband accused in a dowry death case involving burning at the sasural. The court held that unexplained death and the deceased dying at the husband's residence precluded bail. Separate
Prayer for bail rejected and petitioner kept in custody.
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 JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.12292 of 2014
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -31 Year- 2013 Thana -MAHARAJGANJ District- SIWAN
====================================================== Krishna Manjhi, Son Of Ranglal Manjhi, Resident Of Village- Takkipur, P.S. Maharajganj, District- Siwan
.... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shaheen Begum, APP
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI ORAL ORDER
4 11-08-2014 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.
Petitioner who was married with deceased, Sangita about seven years ago, along with other family members have been alleged by the informant, father of deceased regarding treating the deceased with torture and cruelty for fulfilment of demand of dowry and when they became frustrated, they set the deceased on fire who died. Then thereafter, the body was cremated.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that from the written report it is evident that marriage took place about seven years ago. Within seven years or up to seven years is the time schedule which attracts application of Section 304B of the IPC. It has also been submitted that there happens to be general and omnibus nature of allegation and in the aforesaid background
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.12292 of 2014 (4) dt.11-08-2014
2
father-in-law has already been granted bail by the lower court itself. Petitioner happens to be under custody since 14.05.2013.
On the other hand, learned APP opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that being husband, the whole obligation lies on the shoulder of petitioner. It has also been submitted that after concluding investigation charge-sheet has been submitted under Section 302 IPC as well as other allied Sections. It has further been submitted that death was caused at Sasural within the four corners of the house and on account thereof, petitioner being husband was accountable in terms of Section 106 of the Evidence Act to explain the death of deceased whether it was natural, unnatural or suicidal. Petitioner failed to explain this factum also. Not only this, there happens to be statement of witnesses that the dead body was cremated before arrival of the prosecution party.
Taking into account the unexplained death of deceased, petitioner being husband of deceased does not deserve bail. Hence, his prayer for bail is rejected.
(Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J)
perwez
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, accused in a dowry death case under Section 304B IPC/BNS, is entitled to bail.
Whether the petitioner failed to explain unnatural death under Section 106 of the Evidence Act.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
KRISHNA MANJHI
THE STATE OF BIHAR
ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
