Bail application in a pending dowry death case under IPC Sections 304-B and 34 was dismissed. The High Court held that given the serious nature of allegations and witness testimony, the petitioner did not deserve bail.
Application for bail 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.42902 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2019 Thana- RAGHUNATHPUR District- Siwan
======================================================
MAHESHWAR KR. SINGH @ MUNNA @ MUNNA SINGH Son of Premshanker Singh Resident of Village-Santhi, P.S-Raghunathpur, DistrictSiwan.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kundan Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Amitesh Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER
3 24-09-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner is accused in connection with Raghunathpur P.S. Case No. 01 of 2019 registered under sections 304-B, 34 of the I.P.C. pending in the Court of S.D.J.M., Siwan.
Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case on the basis of suspicion. Further submission is that petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 02.01.2019.
Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State opposed the prayer of the petitioner by contending that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42902 of 2019(3) dt.24-09-2019 2/2
petitioner is husband of the deceased and named in the F.I.R. There is direct allegation of killing the deceased by pressing her neck for non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. In course of investigation, the witnesses have also supported the prosecution version. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve privilege of bail.
Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of allegation, I am not inclined to allow the prayer of the petitioner for bail. Accordingly, this application is rejected.
(Arvind Srivastava, J)
shailendra/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner accused in a dowry death case.
Whether the petitioner entitled to privilege of bail despite lack of criminal antecedents.
Maheshwar Kr. Singh @ Munna @ Munna Singh
State of Bihar
Arvind Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
