IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.891 of 2009 MAHESH RAM Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 09. 15.03.2010 The duplicate key has been received in sealed cover from the Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Patna and it is on record. The Viscera report has also been received earlier in a locked and sealed file bag. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that perusal of the report of the Forensic Science Laboratory is necessary for the hearing of the bail application. Therefore, the duplicate key was taken out after opening the seal of the envelope then the lock of the file bag was opened after opening the seal. After opening of the lock a sealed envelope was found inside the file bag. The seal of the envelope was opened and the F.S.L. report bearing F.S.L. No.154 of 2009 dated 20.02.2009 in one laminated sheet was found. The result of the examination as contained in the report shows that DIMETHOATE was detected in the dark-brown fluid of Decomposed Tissues of Viscera and that Dimethoate is an organo-phosporous 2 Pesticide which is commonly used in agriculture for killing pest and is poisonous. Thus, Dimethoate poison was detected in the Viscera. Heard on the bail matter. The petitioner Mahesh Ram is the husband of the deceased. The case is under Section 304B/34 of I.P.C. The informant Jira Devi, the mother-in-law of the deceased Rinku Devi, alleged in F.I.R. day 12.03.2008 that the deceased was married to the petitioner two years back and that day (12.03.2008) the petitioner informed her that Rinku Devi, the deceased was ill and when the informant reached to deceased’s matrimonial house she found her lying dead. She stated that she learnt that the petitioner and others had poisoned the deceased to death. She also alleged that after marriage the petitioner and other in- laws were demanding one T.V. and Gold chain in dowry and that they were threatening to kill the deceased if the demand was not fulfilled. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the deceased had died of ailment and she was 3 under treatment. Learned counsel referred to a prescription of Dr. D.P. Gupta at Para-35 of the case- diary. The prescription simply mentions complain of pain in left side of chest and two medicines were prescribed and the patient (deceased) was referred to S.K.M.C.H., Muzaffarpur. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since last one and half years. Learned Addl.P.P. referred to the inquest report at Para-8 of case-diary and mentioned that the cause of death as suspected at the time of preparation of the inquest report was poisoning. He also submitted that in the referred medical prescription there is nothing specific that the deceased had suffered any specific ailment. Further submission is that information was given to the informant after the death of the deceased and she had found the deceased already dead when she had come after receiving information. Thus, considering the direct allegation that he insisted for demand of dowry and also threatened to 4 kill the deceased in case of non-fulfillment of demand and the death has occurred due to poisoning under other than normal circumstances, I do not find it a fit case for bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is rejected. Let the Forensic Science Laboratory report be kept back in the file bag and locked and returned back to the consignor as required. Mkr. (C. M. Prasad, J.)