Ravindra Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.19493 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -237 Year- 2014 Thana -MAHUA District- VAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ======================================================

1. Ravindra Rai Son of Ram Pratap Rai Both resident of village - Abdulpur, P.S. Mahua, District - Vaishali .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. S.D. Singh Yadav (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 10-02-2016 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case for the offences punishable under sections 304 B, 201 and 120 B of the I.P.C Sunila Devi, the daughter of the informant, was married to the petitioner in the year 2011 and out of the wedlock there is a son but allegedly due to non fulfillment of demand of dowry by way of motorcycle, furniture, golden and silver ornaments the petitioner and other in-laws tortured her and ultimately she was killed and her dead body was thrown which was recovered by the police from a lonely place beneath the bridge.

Submission is of false implication and that the doctor

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.19493 of 2015 (6) dt.10-02-2016 2/2 who has conducted the postmortem has not found any sign of external injury on the person of the deceased and further in the FSL report also no poisonous substance has been detected, the petitioner is a poor driver and he was not present in the house at the time of occurrence, the wife of the petitioner was mentally upset and she left the house to go to her Maike and later on her dead body was recovered under the bridge, the petitioner is suffering in custody since 11.03.2015 and as such he deserves sympathetic consideration, to which the learned A.P.P. opposes by submitting that the petitioner is the husband. In the facts and circumstances as stated above, considering the allegation attributed against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and accordingly his such prayer stands rejected in connection with Mahua P.S. Case No. 237 of 2014 pending in the court of C.J.M. Vaishali at Hajipur.

However, considering detention of the petitioner the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and to conclude the same as early as possible preferably within six months. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) Abhay/- U T