The single judge rejected the bail application of a husband accused of dowry death (Section 304-B IPC) and fabricating evidence (Section 201 IPC), deeming the direct allegation and young marriage duration sufficient to deny liberty.
Bail application rejected; petitioner remains in custody.
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.45621 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-329 Year-2018 Thana- SHIVSAGAR District- Rohtas
======================================================
Upendra Bind, Son Of Uma Bind @ Umashankar Bind, Resident Of VillageSikandarpur, P.S.- Sheosagar (Baddi O.P.), District- Rohtas.
... ... Petitioner/S
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajani Kant Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anil Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER
3 11-04-2022
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304-B and 201/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 01.02.2021, he is a person with clean antecedent and charge-sheet has been submitted in this case.
The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the informant alleges that his daughter was married with the petitioner in the Year 2013 and after marriage, motorcycle and a gold chain was being demanded and on account of nonfulfilment of the said demand, his daughter was met with cruelty
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45621 of 2021(3) dt.11-04-2022 2/3
and torture. On 04.10.2018 at about 11.00 P.M., the informant was informed by Chandani Devi, his other daughter, that victim was killed and her in-laws were taking her dead body for cremation. On the said information, the informant along with the villagers reached the place of occurrence where they saw that the dead body of his daughter was being cremated with the sole purpose of causing disappearance of the evidence.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. The marriage was performed in the Year 2013, till 2018, no allegation of dowry demand was made, but when his daughter died a natural death, the informant falsely implicated the petitioner by instituting the present F.I.R.
Learned A.P.P. opposes the bail application and submits that there is direct allegation against the petitioner and his family members regarding demand of dowry and the marriage was only five years old and petitioner, being husband, is directly responsible for the unnatural death of the death.
Considering the fact that petitioner is the husband of the deceased and the marriage was only five years old and there is allegation of demand of dowry, the Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45621 of 2021(3) dt.11-04-2022 3/3
Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner
stands rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the accused who is the husband of the deceased in a dowry death case involving unnatural death allegations.
Whether the charge-sheet submission and clean antecedents of the petitioner warrant bail discretion.
Upendra Bind
The State Of Bihar
Satyavrata Verma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
