IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.33995 of 2010 Manoj Tiwari son of Sri Sudarshan Tiwari, resident of village- Milki, P.S. Paliganj, District Patna. --- Petitioner. Versus STATE OF BIHAR—Opp. Party. ----------- For the petitioner: M/S Anil Kumar Mishra, Rishikesh Ojha and Nagmani Kumar, Advocates. For the State : Smt. Asha Kumari, Addl. P.P. For the informant: Sri Pravin Kumar Sinha, Adv. ---- 2/ 15-09-2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State as also learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant. In a criminal prosecution registered under section 304B and other allied offences of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioner and four other persons are named in the F.I.R. as accused. In the F.I.R., vide Annexure-1, though there is allegation of demand of dowry against all the accused persons but it has been admitted that on 23.04.2010 the informant was given telephonic information that the deceased was being treated at P.M.C.H., Patna. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that admittedly the informant is not an eye witness and due to accidental fire the deceased sustained certain burn injury, whereafter she was brought to Patna for treatment and was admitted at N.M.C.H., Patna. During the course of treatment, she died due to burn injury and finally her cremation took place at Patna. Death certificate was issued by Patna Municipal Corporation, vide Annexure-2/A. It is also 2 submitted that even during the course of investigation, independent witnesses have not supported the prosecution allegation against the petitioner and finally the entire prosecution case was found to be a “mistake of fact”, whereafter final form, vide Annexure-3, has been submitted on 07.08.2010. The petitioner and other accused persons have not been sent up for trial. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 10.05.2010. Learned counsel for the State as also the informant have strongly opposed the prayer for bail. However, they have not disputed the aforesaid factual matrix about submission of the final report. Only submission is that the final report has not yet been accepted by the learned Magistrate and a protest petition has also been filed, which is available on record in the court below. Taking into consideration the entire facts, particularly the fact that the prosecution case was found to be a mistake of fact and final report has been submitted, the above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M., Danapur, Patna in connection with Paliganj P.S. Case No. 82 of 2010. BTiwary/ ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)