Dismissed

Shrawan Dhankar @ Sharvan Dhankar v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC8 Aug 2025CR. MISC./4193/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application by an accused in custody in a dowry death case under Sections 304(B) and 34 IPC. Trial was directed earlier to conclude within six months but remains pending; prosecution evidence closed, with defence seeking recall of witnesses under Section 311 Cr.P.C. Bail rejected, petitioner directed to cooperate with the trial.

What the court decided

AI extract

Shrawan Dhankar @ Sharvan Dhankar Vs the State of Bihar — Dowry and Cruelty | Patna HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4193 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-19 Year-2023 Thana- SAKATPUR District- Darbhanga

¶3

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

¶4

Shrawan Dhankar @ Sharvan Dhankar S/O Dohar Dhankar @ Dahorwa Dhankar @ Doharwa Dhankar Resident Of Village- Sakatpur, Police StationSakatpur, District- Darbhanga

... ... Petitioner/S

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nilendu Kumar Choudhary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajendra Singh,APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER

¶11

5 08-08-2025 Heard the parties.

¶12

The petitioner is in custody since in connection with S. Tr. No. 458 of 2023 arising out of Sakatpur P.S. Case No. 19 of 2023 registered for the offences under Sections 304(B) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code lodged on 17.02.2023 by the informant, Dileep Kumar.

¶13

As per the prosecution story, the marriage of the victim lady took place with the petitioner but was tortured for dowry and on the fateful day, the parents were informed about the illness of the victim lady and later, another information came that she is dead. Considering her killing by the petitioner and her in-laws, the FIR.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier the bail application was rejected on 10.05.2024 and Trial

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4193 of 2025(5) dt.08-08-2025 2/2

¶16

Court was directed to conclude the trial within six months which has still not been concluded.

¶17

A report was called for from the concerned Court which has come vide letter no. 563 dated 17.07.2025 according to which, all the prosecution witnesses were examined and prosecution evidence was closed and the statement of the accused persons were recorded, when it was fixed for defence evidence, instead, they filed a petition under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. for recall of the PWs 1 to 5 and accordingly. it is fixd for hearing the said petition.

¶18

Learned APP submits that certainly, there is allegation against the petitioner and a delaying tactics has been adopted by way of recall of the prosecution witnesses after they were fully examined and the evidence was closed.

¶19

Considering the allegation that has come against the petitioner as also the development in the Trial which the learned APP has narrated, it would be appropriate that the petitioner co-operate in the trial.

¶20

The bail application shall stands rejected.

¶21

(Rajiv Roy, J)

¶22

Raj Ranjan/- U T

Shrawan Dhankar @ Sharvan Dhankar v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Shrawan Dhankar @ Sharvan Dhankar v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kumar Shekhar Chandra Vs The State of Bihar

Shashi Kala Vs The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Education Department

Tanuja Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Akhilesh Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Chand @ Md. Chand Naddaf @ Chand Naddaf Vs The State of Bihar

Dwarika Nath Singh Vs The State of Bihar and through The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Bihar, Patna