IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.25432 of 2009 1. SHIVJEE DASIL @ SADHUJI @ SHADHUJEE 2. RAMSAKHI DEVI ------------PETITIONERS Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 9.9.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, the informant and the State. A married lady is found with her damaged dead body on railway track. The allegation is that she was killed for lust of dowry. Innocence as submitted for bail, followed by bail to three of the co-accused persons. No doubt Mithilesh Dasil, Urmila Devi and Tarkeshwar Dasil have been allowed bail by this Court vide Cr.Misc.Nos. 18982 of 2009 and 21420 of 2009. Of them, Mithilesh Dasil and Urmila Devi were not named in the F.I.R. Tarkeshwar Dasil was though named like the petitioners and no charge sheet was submitted against him but he is Bhaishur of the deceased. There is clear allegation that there was demand made by each family member of the in- laws. Death is unnatural, may be accidental but within seven years of marriage and petitioners including husband remained engaged to make a case of alibi. If really, it would have been an - 2 - accidental death but that should have been informed by the villagers, having no care of the petitioners. This much of the circumstance strengthens presumption of section 113(b) of the Evidence Act. Thus I find it not a fit case of similar footing nor of innocence for bail. Accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. (Mandhata Singh,J.) AI