Patna High CourtCR. MISC./4581/2022bail rejected

Sopal Sah v. The State Of Bihar

2022-03-30Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4581 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-361 Year-2019 Thana- DALSINGHSARAI District- Samastipur ====================================================== SOPAL SAH S/o- Arjun Sah R/v- Gudarri Market Dalsingsarai, P.S.- Dalsingsarai, District- Samastipur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bharat Lal, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 30-03-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 159 of 2020 arising out of Dalsingsarai P.S. Case No. 361 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304(B) and 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. This is second attempt for grant of regular bail on behalf of the petitioner inasmuch as earlier the bail application of the petitioner was rejected by this Court vide order dated 11.11.2020 passed in Cr. Misc. 23796 of 2020 with liberty to renew his prayer for grant of regular bail after one year. The allegation against the petitioner is that he poured kerosene oil on his wife and set her ablaze due to nonfulfillment of demand of dowry. The statement of victim lady

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4581 of 2022(3) dt.30-03-2022 2/2 has been recorded in paragraph-53 of the case diary in which she has disclosed the name of the petitioner. This Court vide order dated 02.02.2022 had called for a report from the trial court regarding stage of trial and in pursuance thereof, the report of learned ADJ-XI, Samastipur, is on record and from perusal of the same, it appears that the trial court has given the estimated time for conclusion of the trial within six months.

Since the bail application of the petitioner was earlier rejected by this Court on its own merit, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected.

However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after six months.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) S.Ali/- U T