Amit Tiwary @ Amit Tiwari vs The State Of Jharkhand
2026 Latest Caselaw 1464 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Amit Tiwary @ Amit Tiwari vs The State Of Jharkhand on 24 February, 2026

Author: Rongon Mukhopadhyay

Bench: Rongon Mukhopadhyay

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                            Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 1569 of 2025

          Amit Tiwary @ Amit Tiwari                                   ---   Appellant
                                              Versus
          The State of Jharkhand.                              ---    ---   Respondent
                                               ---

CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pradeep Kumar Srivastava

---

                For the Appellant      :     Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, Sr. Advocate
                For the Respondent     :     A.P.P.

                       I.A. No.1629 of 2026
04/24.02.2026          Heard Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, learned senior counsel appearing for
          the appellant and learned A.P.P.

This application has been preferred by the appellant for grant of bail to him during pendency of the appeal.

The appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 304(B) of IPC and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years.

It has been alleged that the daughter of the informant was burnt for not fulfilling the demand of dowry and ultimately she succumbed to her injury during treatment.

Submission has been advanced by learned senior counsel for the appellant that the evidence of witnesses reveals that the appellant had also suffered burn injuries which indicates that he was trying to save her life. Refusing to the evidence of P.W.7 learned senior counsel adds that none of the witnesses have stated about any statement made by the deceased prior to her death. The Doctor has not been examined and in fact the deceased had died on account of flame burn suffered by her. Learned senior counsel further submits that the appellant is in custody since 24.09.2021 and is on the verge of completing half of the sentence imposed upon him.

Learned A.P.P has opposed the prayer of the appellant for bail. The appellant is the husband of the deceased and the evidence of the witnesses does indicate that just prior to the unnatural death there was a demand of dowry made from the side of the appellant.

On such consideration therefore, we are not inclined to admit the appellant on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the appellant is hereby rejected at this stage.

I.A. No. 1629 of 2026 stands rejected.

(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.)

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) Shamim/ Uploaded on : 24 /02/2026