Dismissed

Mantu Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC28 Nov 2023CR. MISC./8458/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court rejected the petitioner's bail application in a dowry death case under Section 304(B) IPC, refusing to enlarge him due to the serious nature of allegations despite his claim of innocence and lack of witnesses. The court directed the trial court to expedite proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for bail stands rejected; trial court directed to expedite trial.

Mantu Kumar Vs the State of Bihar — Dowry and Cruelty | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8458 of 2023

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-883 Year-2022 Thana- JAHANABAD District- Jehanabad

¶3

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

¶4

MANTU KUMAR Son of Late Amrendra Kumar @ Nonu Jee R/vKisrampur, P.S.- Okri (Ghoshi), District- Jehanabad

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar Mr. B.P. Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Madhura Nand Jha ======================================================

¶7

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER

¶8

6 28-11-2023

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶10

APP for the State.

¶11

The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Jehanabad P.S. case No. 883 of 2022 instituted for the offence under Sections 304(b) of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

It is a case of causing death of his wife by the petitioner after administering the poison.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and committed no offence. The petitioner is husband of the deceased due to which he has falsely been implicated in this case. It is further submitted that marriage of petitioner was solemnized with the deceased in the year of 2010, hence no case u/s 304B of I.P.C is made out. There is no eye witness of the alleged occurrence and no consistent evidence

¶14

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8458 of 2023(6) dt.28-11-2023 2/2

¶15

against the petitioner. The petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and languishing in judicial custody since 04.11.2022.

¶16

Learned APP appearing for the state has opposed the prayer of regular bail and submitted that the petitioner is husband of the deceased upon whom, ample responsibility to keep his wife well. It is also submitted that as per the postmortem report, the cause of death of the deceased has been preserved for the want of viscera and according to the Viscera report, organochloro pesticide was detected in the body the deceased which is used for killing pests in agriculture and is highly poisonous. It is further submitted that during investigation, witnesses of this case have also supported the prosecution case.

¶17

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

¶18

The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as soon as possible.

¶19

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J)

¶20

lata/- U T

Mantu Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mantu Kumar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ravi Ranjan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ramashish Ray @ Ramashish Rai Vs the State of Bihar

Azad Chaudhary @ Azad Kumar @ Ajad Chaudhary Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Faizan Vs The State of Bihar

Jawahar Sah Vs The State of Bihar

MD Abdul @ Dhanif Vs the State of Bihar