IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.11446 of 2010 PAPPU RAM @ SUNIL KUMAR @ PAPPU KUMAR Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 5.7.2010 KHAN Heard counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner is an accused in a case under sections 498A, 302, 201/34 of the Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the offence took place within the jurisdiction of Kaimur district, whereas the instant complaint was lodged in Sasaram under the Rohtas district. He further submits that the victim girl Anita Devi died on account of fall of wall of the house and as such the death was accidental. Many witnesses have also supported the aforesaid fact and the police had also noted the dilapidated condition of the wall. It appears from the prosecution case that earlier a case under section 498A of the Penal Code was filed which was compromised. Having considered the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. His prayer for bail is rejected. However, he may renew his prayer for bail after six months. (S.P.Singh,J)