SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 3002

PATNA HIGH COURT
CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH, J
Durga Rai – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77607 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.Rudal Singh
For the Respondents: Mr.Mithlesh Kumar Khare

No substantial evidence warrants denial of bail in dowry-related murder cases when presence in custody and lack of prior criminal records are considered.

Headnote:In this matter concerning the grant of regular bail under Sections 304B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioner, alleged to be involved in a dowry-related murder, contends his innocence amidst general allegations. The prosecution's failure to substantiate claims, coupled with the petitioner's lack of criminal antecedents and the co-accused's previous bail allowance, persuaded the court to permit bail. Key issues centered on the reality of dowry demands and the nature of accusations. The court's rationale emphasized insufficient evidence for denial of bail against the appellant. The application stands allowed.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER

2 01-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with G.R. No. 1044 of 2024 arising out of Bidupur P.S. Case No. 114 of 2024 dated 11.03.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code .

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and the co-accused persons are alleged to have strangulated the informant’s daughter to death due to non-fulfillment of demand of Rs. 2 lakh and a motorcycle as dowry.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner who is the husband of the deceased. The petitioner neither demanded any dowry nor tortured the informant’s daughter. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged offence. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The complainant in her examination-in-chief has not supported the prosecution case. The petitioner is in custody since 26.10.2024. The co-accused has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 28.03.2025 passed in Cr.

Misc. No. 71040 of 2024.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the bail petition of the petitioner by submitting that the petitioner is the husband of the deceased.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of custody, the petitioner above-named, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Vaishali in connection with G.R. No. 1044/2024 arising out of Bidupur P.S. Case No. 114 of 2024, with the condition:-

(i). The petitioner is directed to remain physically present before the learned Court below on each and every date, failing which on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause, the bail bond of the petitioner is liable to be cancelled.

7. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top