Allowed

Sunil Singh v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC11 Apr 2023CR. MISC./40316/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This oral order grants regular bail to the petitioner, the husband of the deceased, in a Parsa Bazar case concerning Section 304(B) and dowry death. The court considered the long custody period and a compromise petition filed by the informant, allowing bail on a Rs. 10,000 bond.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner shall be enlarged on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.

Sunil Singh Vs The State of Bihar — Dowry and Cruelty | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40316 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-205 Year-2020 Thana- PARSABAZAR District- Patna

¶3

======================================================

¶4

SUNIL SINGH Son of Munna Singh Resident of Village Ismailpur, P.S.Parsa Bazar, District – Patna.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Bijendra Singh, Son of Late Dhanu Singh, R/O Vill- Miyanchak, P.S.Dhanarua, P.O.- Nadwan, Dist- Patna.

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

======================================================

¶11

Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N. A. Shamsi, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, APP For the Informant/s : Mr. Sheo Nandan Pandit, Advocate Mr. Brij Mohan Das, Advocate ======================================================

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶13

6 11-04-2023

¶14

Let the defect(s), if any, pointed out by the office be

¶15

removed within four weeks from the date of this order, failing which the matter be listed again under the appropriate heading for necessary action.

¶16

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

¶17

Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Parsa Bazar P.S. Case No. 205 of 2020,dated 14.05.2020, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304(B), 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

As per the prosecution, the informant’s daughter was administered with poison by this petitioner(husband of the

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40316 of 2022(6) dt.11-04-2023 2/3

¶20

deceased) and other accused persons over non-fulfillment of dowry demand. Further it is alleged that earlier also the deceased was tortured and assaulted by this petitioner and her in-laws.

¶21

The main submissions advanced by petitioner’s counsel are that the petitioner who happens to be the husband of the deceased has been languishing in jail since 20.01.2021 and he himself surrendered before the Court concerned, their marriage took place in the year 2018 and till the date of death of the victim no complaint was made or filed in respect of any dowry demand by the victim against the accused persons including the petitioner, in fact the victim herself consumed poison and thereafter the petitioner and his family members rushed her to the hospital and also informed the parental family members of the victim who arrived at the hospital and the said facts have been supported by the informant and his close relatives during investigation and the same show the petitioner’s innocence in the alleged occurrence. Further submission is that in actual the informant consented to the cremation of the victim and thereafter with malice intention as well as under misguidance lodged the FIR but in the present time a good relation has established in between both the parties and after

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40316 of 2022(6) dt.11-04-2023 3/3

¶23

realizing his mistake the informant filed a compromise petition in the present matter before the Trial Court.

¶24

Learned counsel appearing for the informant accepted the fact of the said compromise in between both the parties.

¶25

Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶26

Considering the above submissions and mainly the petitioner’s custody period and also the fact that the investigation has been completed against the petitioner, in my opinion a lenient approach can be taken in respect of the petitioner’s prayer for bail. Accordingly, let the petitioner named-above be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the concerned Court in connection with Parsa Bazar P.S. Case No. 205 of 2020.

¶27

(Shailendra Singh, J.)

¶28

maynaz/-

¶29

U T

Sunil Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mukul Kumar Thakur Vs The State of Bihar

Chandan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Utkarsh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ram Udgar Mahto Vs the State of Bihar

Pintu Kumar Pandit Vs The State of Bihar

Noorshad @ Don @ Nurshed @ Don @ Noorshad Alam Vs The State of Bihar