Ajit Ram vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 1195 Patna

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
             CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 31942 of 2020
    Arising Out of PS Case No.-539 Year-2019 Thana- MINAPUR District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================

Ajit Ram, aged about 35 years, Gender-Male, Son of Kishore Ram Resident of Village- Panapur (OP Meenapur), Police Station- Meenapur, District- Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raju Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Nagendra Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 02-03-2021

The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

2. Heard Mr. Raju Kumar, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Mr. Nagendra Prasad, learned Additional Public

Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the State.

3. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with

Minapur PS Case No. 539 of 2019 dated 17.10.2019, instituted

under Sections 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. The allegation against the petitioner, who is the

husband of the deceased daughter of the informant, is of killing

her and cremating the body without waiting for the informant or

his family members.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31942 of 2020 dt.02-03-2021

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

though he is the husband but there was no foul play and

postmortem was also conducted.

6. Learned APP submitted that the allegation is that the

petitioner and his family members were demanding dowry and

due to non-fulfillment, she was killed and the postmortem report

reveals that the deceased died due to asphyxia as a result of ante-

mortem pressure over neck, as has been noted by the learned

Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur while dismissing the prayer for

anticipatory bail of the petitioner on 04.06.2020 in Anticipatory

Bail Petition No. 683 of 2020.

7. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the

case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court

is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)

P. Kumar

AFR/NAFR U T