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
6 paragraphs · 233 wordsGautam Kumar Choudhary, J
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner named above has been made accused in connection with Sarath P.S. Case No. 179 of 2022 (S.T. No. 116 of 2023) for the offence under Sections 304B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of Addl. Sessions Judge-I, Madhupur.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is the husband of the deceased and the cause of death, as per the postmortem report, was asphyxia due to drowning in a public well. After investigation, charge sheet was submitted only against the petitioner and the other family members have been exonerated from the charges. Although there is reference to the demand of dowry in the FIR but there is no further imputation as to what was the actual demand. In absence of specific reference to article of dowry that was demanded on a mere bald assertion of dowry demand, Section 304-B of IPC will not be attracted.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the witnesses have consistently supported the case of the dowry demand.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner, named above, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Court below.