In a criminal miscellaneous petition challenging the refusal of bail, the petitioner alleged false implication in a dowry death case. The court rejected the bail plea, holding that the onus lies on the husband to explain the cause of death.
Bail to the petitioner rejected in connection with Gaurichak P.S. Case No. 394 of 2018.
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.11650 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-394 Year-2018 Thana- GAURICHAK District- Patna
======================================================
VISHAL PASWAN @ KANCHAN PASWAN (Male), aged about 25 years, Son of Rajendra Paswan, Resident of Village - Kandap, P.S.- Gaurichak, District - Patna.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr.Rajiva Ranjan, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : Mr.Surendra Prasad Singh, A.P.P. ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER
4 18-06-2019
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner is languishing in custody since 25.10.2018 in a case for the offence registered under Section 304(B)/34 of the IPC.
The prosecution story, in brief, is that the accused persons including the petitioner killed the victim due to nonfulfilment of demand of dowry.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. Charge sheet has been submitted in the present case. There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11650 of 2019(4) dt.18-06-2019 2/2
present case due to petty family dispute. The petitioner is the husband of the victim. There is no substantive evidence to suggest the implication of the petitioner in the present case.
On behalf of the learned counsel for the State, it has been submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. The petitioner is the husband of the deceased. The onus is on him to explain the cause of death of the deceased.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The same is rejected in connection with Gaurichak P.S. Case No. 394 of 2018, pending in the court of learned A.C.J.M. Patna City.
The court below is directed to take all necessary steps to conclude the trial preferably within a period of nine months from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order.
(Sudhir Singh, J)
U.K./-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner in the case of alleged heinous offence of dowry death.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Vishal Paswan @ Kanchan Paswan
The State of Bihar
Sudhir Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
