High CourtsSingle Bench

Bikram Mukhiya And Anr vs State Of Bihar

Patna High Court · Decided on 5 November 2020 · Citation: (2020) 11 PAT CK 0014

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 304B · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438(2)
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 25375 Of 2020
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 484 words
1.

The matter has been heard via video conferencing due to circumstances prevailing on account of the COVID-19 pandemic.

2.

Heard Mr. B N Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Tarkeshwar Nath Thakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the State.

3.

The petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with Nautan PS Case No. 377 of 2018 dated 16.07.2018, instituted under Sections 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

4.

The petitioners, who are father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased daughter of the informant, are alleged to have assaulted and beaten her and sent her to the matrimonial home on 13.07.2018 in the evening demanding Rs. 2 lakhs dowry due to which on 14.07.2018 in the morning, she had committed suicide.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that there is no truth in the allegation as the deceased was married to their son on 04.05.2018 and, thus, it cannot be believed that within two months, she would be brutally assaulted and sent to the matrimonial home knowing fully well that her father was living at Arunachal Pradesh and not at the village home. It was submitted that besides the allegation being totally false, even the inquest and postmortem report do not disclose any mark of assault or torture on the body of the deceased and only ligature mark has been found on the neck and the cause of death has been opined to be asphyxia due to hanging. Learned counsel submitted that there is absolutely no corroboration of any wrong doing on their part. It was submitted that the fact is that the deceased was married to the son of the petitioners against her wishes as she wanted to marry someone else due to which she had committed suicide. Learned counsel submitted that the son of the petitioners is already in jail since 03.09.2019 and the petitioners have no criminal antecedent.

6.

Learned APP submitted that the deceased had committed suicide only because she was ill-treated at her matrimonial home. However, he could not controvert the fact that desipte there being specific allegation of brutal assault on the deceased, in the inquest as well as postmortem report, no external injury on the body except for ligature mark on the neck has been found.

7.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, in the event of arrest or surrender before the Court below within six weeks from today, the petitioners be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, West Champaran, Bettiah in Nautan PS Case No. 377 of 2018, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

8.

The application stands disposed off in the aforementioned terms.