The Patna High Court rejected the petitioner’s application for anticipatory bail in a dowry death case. The Court noted the deceased’s dying statement implicated him as the instigator of the arson despite his claim of non-involvement.
Petitioner’s application for anticipatory bail was 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.46474 of 2017
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -246 Year- 2017 Thana -GOGRI District- KHAGARIA
====================================================== Nizam @ Sheikh Nizamuddin, Son of Late Md. Sheikh Masudan, resident of village- Ithari Ward No.- 2, Police Station- Gogari, District- Khagaria.
.... .... Petitioner
The State of Bihar.
Versus .... .... Opposite Party
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Smt. Indu Bala Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER
2 03-10-2017 Heard both sides.
Petitioner apprehends his arrest in Gogari P.S. Case No.246 of 2017 under Sections 307, 328/34 of the Indian Penal Code and ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act later on Section 304B of the I.P.C. was added.
The deceased herself stated that she was married to Sheikh Mantu about 15-20 years ago but her husband Sheikh Mantu and her father-in-law Nizam (petitioner) used to assault her due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. She further alleged that on the date of occurrence, the petitioner sprinkled kerosene oil and her husband ignited fire in her body.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the father-in-law of the deceased. The marriage was
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.46474 of 2017 (2) dt.03-10-2017
2/2
solemnized 20 years ago. The petitioner is an old man and he has nothing to do with the family affairs of the deceased and her husband but I find that the deceased while she was under treatment made further statement that it was petitioner, the father-in-law, who sprinkled kerosene oil on her body and her husband ignited fire. Consequently, the deceased got burn injury and died during the course of treatment.
Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J)
N.H./-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is eligible for anticipatory bail in a case involving dowry death and arson.
Whether the deceased’s statement implicating the petitioner justifies denying anticipatory bail.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Nizam @ Sheikh Nizamuddin
The State of Bihar
Prabhat Kumar Jha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
