The Criminal Misc. Petition seeking anticipatory bail against murder charges linked to a dowry situation was dismissed. The court held that witness testimony supporting the occurrence rendered the petitioners not fit for bail, directing removal of case defects within one month.
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.5794 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-69 Year-2021 Thana- KOTWA District- East Champaran
======================================================
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sangeet Deokuliar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Nityanand ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 24-08-2022
The learned counsel for the petitioners is directed to remove all the defects pointed out by the office within one month.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Kotwa P.S. Case No. 69 of 2021 registered for offence punishable under sections 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
As per allegation, the marriage of deceased Ruma Devi, the daughter of informant was solemnized with co-accused Vijay Paswan in the year 2012. The accused persons subjected her to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5794 of 2022(2) dt.24-08-2022 2/2
cruelty for non-fulfillment of dowry demand of Rs. 5,00,000/- cash. The accused persons had threatened to solemnize the second marriage of the husband if their demand is not fulfilled. On 02.04.2021 at about 9:30 A.M., the husband and accused persons committed murder of the deceased.
The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that petitioners are in-laws and the informant has filed compromise petition and the husband is still in judicial custody.
There is allegation against the petitioners that they have tortured the victim for non-fulfillment of the dowry demand and the overt acts of the accused persons have been mentioned in the FIR. The witnesses in paragraph 12, 13 and 14 of the case diary have supported the occurrence, as such, in my view, it is not a fit case for anticipatory bail. Accordingly, it is rejected.
Office shall ensure that all defects are removed by the petitioners within the stipulated time mentioned hereinabove, failing which, the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.
(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)
Mahesh/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioners are eligible for anticipatory bail in connection with allegations of murder under sections 302/201/34 IPC arising from a dowry dispute.
Whether the existence of witnesses supporting the occurrence makes the case unfit for anticipatory bail despite an alleged compromise.
Shatrudhan Paswan
Rima Devi
Kameshwar Paswan
Ramkali Devi
Ram Vinay Paswan
The State of Bihar
Nawneet Kumar Pandey
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
