Case Facts:
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.30577 of 2012 (3) dt.26-09-2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No. 30577 of 2012 ====================================================== Upendra Kumar @ Upendra Prasad .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL PRASAD ORAL ORDER 3 26-09-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. This is a petition for grant of regular bail in a case under [STATUTE] . The petitioner is said to be the husband of the deceased. The dead body was recovered from the village well. The post-mortem report shows the whole body swollen and maggots present over body and cause of death is said to be asphyxia due to throttling. The dead body was recovered and not identified at the early stage but later was identified by the brother of the victim who disclosed about the demand of dowry and subjecting cruelty and the identification was made identifying the photograph of the deceased. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, contended that the dead body was recovered on 10.05.2011 which was not identified by any one and later from the photograph identification is not possible. The marriage is alleged to have been solemnized in the year 2006 and there is allegation of demand of dowry and on non-fulfilment of the same, subjecting cruelty and the victim died and dead body was found from the village well of the petitioner and about missing of the victim Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.30577 of 2012 (3) dt.26-09-2012 was not reported by the petitioner and hence the death is in suspicious circumstance. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is in jail since 11.11.2011 and the period of custody may be considered. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. The trial court is directed to conclude the trial preferably within a year. Kundan/- (Gopal Prasad, J.)

Applicable IPC Section: 201

Statute Text:
Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code. Causing disappearance of evidence of an offence committed, or giving false information touching it to screen the offender, If a capital offence. Whoever, knowing or having reason to believe that an offence has been committed, causes any evidence of the commission of that offence to disappear, with the intention of screening the offender from legal punishment, or with that intention gives any information respecting the offence which he knows or believes to be false; if a capital offence — shall, if the offence which he knows or believes to have been committed is punishable with death, be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine; if punishable with imprisonment for life — and if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment which may extend to ten years, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine; if punishable with less than ten years imprisonment — and if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for any term not extending to ten years, shall be punished with imprisonment of the description provided for the offence, for a term which may extend to one-fourth part of the longest term of the imprisonment provided for the offence, or with fine, or with both.