Ajit Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.629 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-119 Year-2018 Thana- SANGRAMPUR District- Munger ====================================================== Ajit Sah, S/o Mahendra Sah, Resident of village- Dadrijala, P.S. - Sangrampur, District- Munger.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ram Sevak Choudhary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Yogendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 3/ 13-03-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Petitioner seeks bail in Sangrampur P.S. Case No.119 of 2018 instituted for the offence under Section(s) 304B, 201, 120-B Indian Penal Code pending in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Munger.

Petitioner is husband of the deceased.

In the written report, it is alleged that deceased was married with the petitioner about two years back. She was tortured in the Sasural for demand of dowry. Ultimately, she was done to death in Sasural by burn injuries and dead body was disposed off.

It is submitted by the learned APP that dead body was recovered and inquest report was prepared, which fact finds

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.629 of 2019(3) dt.13-03-2019 2/2 mention in the case diary. Learned APP further submits that postmortem of the deceased was done and doctor has found superficial burn injury all over the body. The doctor has opined that death has taken place due to extensive burn injuries. In such circumstances, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

Prayer of the petitioner for grant of bail is rejected at this stage.

The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and make all efforts to conclude the same as early as possible, preferably, within a period of one year from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Liberty is given to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after one year, if no substantive progress is made in the trial.

(Sanjay Priya, J) J. Alam/- U T