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

HIGH COURT OF PATNA
Mr. Justice Sunil Kumar Panwar
SULTAN ANSARI – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR – Respondent
CR. MISC./44497/2021



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44497 of 2021

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-235 Year-2020 Thana- GAIGHAT District- Muzaffarpur

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

SULTAN ANSARI Son of Iliyas Ansari Resident of Village - Hasna, P.s.-

Gaighat, District - Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

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

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s

:

Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, Advocate

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. APP

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR

ORAL ORDER

3

06-04-2022

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

APP for the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case

registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304(B)

and 328/34 of the IPC.

It is a case of dowry death due to non-fulfilment of

dowry demand of Rs.2,50,000/- and a motorcycle by poisoning

his wife to death who was pregnant and prior to that poisoning,

the petitioner along with other co-accused persons used to

torture her for non-fulfilment of dowry.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner

that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He

further submits that the deceased was died due to snake bite and

not due to poisoning by the accused persons along with the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44497 of 2021(3) dt.06-04-2022

2/2

petitioner.

Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the

prayer for anticipatory bail.

From perusal of the case diary, it appears that the

prosecution witnesses have supported the case of the

prosecution and postmortem report also reveals that the cause of

death is not ascertained and visera is preserved for chemical

analysis. Petitioner is the husband of the deceased who has

ample responsibility to behave properly to the deceased and the

death was unnatural, considering which, I am not inclined to

grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.

Brajesh Kumar/-

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J)

U

T

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top