This order by the Patna High Court refuses bail to the petitioner, a husband accused of dowry death under Section 304B/34 IPC. While counsel argued the victim suffered from mental illness, the court denied the bail prayer without elaboration.
Prayer for bail refused. Petitioner allowed to renew prayer if trial not concluded within nine months.
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.10688 of 2020
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-70 Year-2019 Thana- DALSINGHSARAI District- Samastipur
======================================================
VIKKY KUMAR SAH Son of Late Anandi Sah Resident of Mohalla- Main Bazar Ward No.6, P.S.- Dalsingsarai, Dist.- Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Nilesh Kumar, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Madan Kumar, APP. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER
3 02-06-2020 This matter has been taken up through Video Conferencing.
Heard the parties.
The petitioner is languishing in custody for the offences punishable under Section 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Petitioner is husband of the victim of dowry death. Unnatural death of the wife of the petitioner took place in the house of the petitioner within few years of the marriage and the allegation is of demand of more dowry and torture for the same. The torture was used to be informed by the victim on mobile call. The family members of the informant have supported the allegation of demand of dowry and torture for the same. Petitioner is in custody since 23.08.2019.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10688 of 2020(3) dt.02-06-2020 2/2
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that false and concocted allegation is there. Victim was herself a patient of mental illness and she was being treated by a local doctor, Dr. Vibhash Ranjan whose prescriptions are at Annexure-3 Series.
The prescriptions at Annexure-3 are of a child specialist and do not show that the victim was being treated for her mental illness.
Considering the material aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail for the present in connection with Dalsingsarai P.S. Case No. 70 of 2019 pending in the Court of learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Dalsingsarai, Samastipur.
Hence, prayer for bail of the petitioner is refused.
If the trial is not concluded within nine months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, petitioner may renew prayer for bail.
(Birendra Kumar, J)
mantreshwar/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be granted bail in a case of alleged dowry death involving unnatural death of the wife.
Whether false allegations and mental illness of the victim warrant bail under Section 304B/34 IPC.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
VIKKY KUMAR SAH
The State of Bihar
BIRENDRA KUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
