Special Judge rejected bail application of appellant BIPIN YADAV, accused in dowry-linked murder case. High Court summarily dismissed appeal against bail rejection without detailed reasoning.
Prayer for bail rejected; appeal against bail rejection dismissed.
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 APPEAL (SJ) No.304 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-217 Year-2020 Thana- CHANPATIA District- West Champaran
======================================================
BIPIN YADAV Son of Sadhu Yadav Resident of Village- Karnapatti, P.s.Chanpatiya, District- West Champaran.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr.Sachida Nand Rai For the Respondent/s : Mrs.Usha Kumari 1 For the Informant : Mr.Mrigendra Kumar ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 22-09-2022
Let the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, be removed within a period of
four weeks from today.
Heard the parties.
The appellant has filed the instant appeal against the order dated 08.12.2021 passed in by the learned 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge SC/ST, Bettiah, West Champaran whereby the prayer for bail of the appellant in connection with Chanpatiya P.S. Case no. 217/2020 registered under sections 304(B), 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 3(i) (r) (s) /3(2) (v) (v-a) of the SC & ST (POA) Act was rejected.
As per prosecution case, there is accusation against the appellant and others to have committed murder of the informant’s daughter due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.304 of 2022 dt.22-09-2022 2/2
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is in custody since 02.08.2021 and bears no criminal antecedent. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that appellant has falsely been implicated in this case being husband of the deceased. There is no specific allegation against the appellant. Allegation against the appellant is general and omnibus in nature. He further submits that the appellant had love marriage with the informant’s daughter, which was inter-caste marriage. From the wedlock one male child born and both the wife and husband were living happily but the wife of the appellant was having ill health to whom the appellant was providing medicine by getting her treatment by a local doctor who was suffering from anemia, but she died because of the said disease.
The learned Spl. P.P. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant and submit that the appellant is husband of the deceased.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation levelled against the appellant, legal presumption of law as well as material available on record, I am not inclined to grant bail to the appellant. Hence, prayer for bail of the appellant stands rejected.
The appeal stands disposed off.
(Alok Kumar Pandey, J)
amitkumar/-
| AFR/NAFR | NAFR |
|---|---|
| CAV DATE | N/A |
| Uploading Date | 06.10.2022 |
| Transmission Date | 06.10.2022 |
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appellant is entitled to bail in a case involving dowry-related murder and SC/ST (POA) Act allegations.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
BIPIN YADAV
THE STATE OF BIHAR
ALOK KUMAR PANDEY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
