A criminal miscellaneous petition for bail was filed by the husband accused of murdering his wife allegedly due to dowry demands. The High Court examined the grave nature of the offense and the presence of the accused at the scene before denying bail.
Prayer for bail to the petitioner Ashok Mahto is 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 JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.43543 of 2016
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -162 Year- 2015 Thana -KOTWA DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI)
======================================================
ASHOK MAHTO SON OF MUNDRIKA MAHTO @ MUNIRKA MAHTO RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - MACHHARGANWA, P.S. - KOTWA, DISTRICT - EAST CHAMPARAN AT MOTIHARI.
.... .... PETITIONER/S
VERSUS
THE STATE OF BIHAR .... .... OPPOSITE PARTY/S ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gopal Sharan Singh, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt. Madhuri Lata, APP
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI ORAL ORDER
3 13-12-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor.
Just after three months of the marriage, deceased met with unnatural death by way of throttling and after keeping her dead body in a bag, the same was thrown in a canal regarding which informant had came to know after three days. There happens to be disclosure in the written report that during intervening period there was demand of dowry at the end of the petitioner along with his family members and for that she was regularly tortured and lastly on 06.07.2015 deceased was kicked out. It has also been incorporated that informant had persuaded them and on account thereof, lastly the deceased was taken away on 31.07.2015 and murder was committed on 04.08.2015.
It has been contended on behalf of petitioner that in the second leg of allegation his name does not appear and on that very basis, it has been submitted that petitioner should be released on bail. It has also been submitted that other co-accused either been released on anticipatory bail or on regular bail. It has also been submitted that
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.43543 of 2016 (3) dt.13-12-2016
2
petitioner happens to be under custody since 05.08.2016.
The learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the
prayer.
Deceased was done to death at her Sasural and so certainly informant could not be identified as an eyewitness. Death by throttling and keeping the dead body in a bag and after tying its mouth having it been thrown in a canal speaks a lot about activity of the accused. Moreover, the informant in his further statement along with statement of other witnesses presence of petitioner has been shown. Being the husband, the plea of the petitioner could not be entertained on such flimsy ground.
Prayer for bail is rejected.
(Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J.)
Prakash Narayan U T
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner accused in a murder charge alleging dowry death should be released on bail.
Whether the petitioner's absence from the second leg of the witness statement is sufficient ground for bail.
Whether the petitioner's plea as husband in a murder case can be entertained on flimsy grounds.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Prakash NarayanReferred¶20
Prakash Narayan U T
ASHOK MAHTO
THE STATE OF BIHAR
ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
