Chetan Sao v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.10968 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -158 Year- 2014 Thana -KADAMKUAN District- PATNA ====================================================== Chetan Sao son of Late Kamla Prasad, resident of Mohalla- Nathu Gope Lane, Chai Tola, P.S.- Kadamuan, District- Patna. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Madan Jeet Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. J. N. Thakur, APP. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 30-06-2016 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the State. None appears for the informant.

The Petitioner being the husband of the victim languishing in jail since 13.02.2015 in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 304B and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The basic accusation is of killing the daughter of the informant after about 5 years of marriage by administering poison.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no eye witness to the occurrence. The victim died due to illness and the accusation of torture for demand of dowry after five years of marriage appears to be

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.10968 of 2016 (9) dt.30-06-2016 2/2 unreasonable.

A report from the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VII, Patna reflects that out of seven witnesses, only two witnesses have been examined, though this report stipulates that it will take one and half year to conclude the trial which appears to be unreasonable.

Considering the nature of accusation against the petitioner being husband of the victim, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner in connection with Kadamkuan P.S. Case No. 158 of 2014 pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-VII, Patna.

Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 13.02.2015, it is expected from the learned Court below to conclude the trial within seven months. If the trial is not concluded within seven months, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

Let the order be transmitted to the learned Court below.

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.) Mishra/- U T