IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.35180 of 2011 Uma Shankar Shrivastava @ Ajay Kumar Shrivastava Versus The State Of Bihar ----------- 03/ 16.11.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State. Petitioner being husband of the deceased is languishing in jail custody since 23.4.2011 in a case registered under section 304B/34 of the IPC. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that according to the prosecution case itself, fardbeyan of the informant was recorded at 5.30 P.M. and formal FIR was registered at 7.30 P.M. on 22.4.2011 and after recording fardbeyan of the informant, the statement of the deceased was recorded which has been mentioned at para 3 of the case diary. It is contended by him that aforesaid so-called dying declaration of the deceased is manufactured and engineered document and, as a matter of fact, deceases was not in a position to make statement. If the deceased gave dying declaration what prevented the police to register the case on the basis of the aforesaid dying declaration of the deceased. It is further contended by him that, as a matter of fact, on the alleged date of occurrence petitioner along with his sister had gone to catch bus but the deceased was caught in fire at the house of the petitioner and when the petitioner got information on telephone from his neighbour, he rushed to the place of the occurrence and subsequently, he was arrested by the police at the behest of the informant of this case. It is also contended by him that admittedly, 2 marriage of the petitioner had taken place in the year 2005 and the deceased died in the year 2011 and between the aforesaid period, she happily spent her married life with the petitioner and there was no demand of dowry. To fortify his contention, he referred some paragraphs of the case diary. On the other hand, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer pointing out that the deceased died on account of burn injuries and there is specific allegation against the petitioner that he put the deceased on fire and harassment on account of non-fulfillment of illegal demand of dowry. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as materials available on the case diary, I think it proper to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, petitioner, Uma Shankar Shrivastava @ Ajay Kumar Shrivastava, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Addl. Sessions Judge VI, Muzaffarpur in Sessions Trial no. 480/2011 arising out of Mithnapura P.S. Case no. 122/2011. shahid (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J)