Case Facts:
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.22927 of 2011 (5) dt.05-12-2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.22927 of 2011 ====================================================== Arun Paswan, son of Satyendra Paswan, resident of Village-Pathura, P.S.- Imamganj, District-Gaya. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANANDAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 5 05-12-2012 This is a third attempt by the petitioner for bail. Case is under [STATUTE] . Petitioner is the husband and allegation against him is of having brutally assaulted the lady and of having strangulated her. In the FIR allegation against the petitioner is of demand of motorcycle and assault on the deceased in the presence of the informant, i.e., father of the lady. After about month of the said occurrence, informant received information of death of his daughter and when he went to the place of the petitioner he was informed that this petitioner, his father and his mother had poured hot water on the body of the deceased and had strangulated her to death and broken her teeth and, with a view to conceal the body, had thrown it in a well of Kail Mahto. This statement of the informant is specific against the petitioner and others. Obviously, the presumption against the petitioner under Section 113-B of the Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.22927 of 2011 (5) dt.05-12-2012 Evidence Act arises of having caused dowry death. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the prosecution has not produced evidence and has now started producing only formal witnesses. He submits that the report called for by this Court shows that hardly any progress has been made in the trial. In the case of dowry death the trial court has to proceed and conclude the trial on the basis of evidence, facts and law. If the prosecution does not produce evidence that does not rebut the presumption arising against the accused persons in terms of the said Section 113-B of the Evidence Act. In the circumstances, the trial court is not required to wait indefinitely for concluding the trial in accordance with law and pronouncing its judgment. In any case only because the prosecution is not producing evidence the allegation against the petitioner does not get watered down. Hence, this Court is not inclined to allow the bail application of the petitioner this time also and the same is dismissed. Arvind/- (Jayanandan Singh, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 304B

Statute Text:
Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code. Dowry death. Where the death of a woman is caused by any burns or bodily injury or occurs otherwise than under normal circumstances within seven years of her marriage and it is shown that soon before her death she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, such death shall be called "dowry death", and such husband or relative shall be deemed to have caused her death. Whoever commits dowry death shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than seven years but which may extend to imprisonment for life.