Mantu Lal v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.20014 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -141 Year- 2012 Thana -KOCHAS District- SASARAM (ROHTAS) ====================================================== Mantu Lal S/o Sanjay Lal R/o Village Kochas (Buxar Road), P.S. Kochas, District Rohtas, Bihar.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Surendra Kumar Singh, Adv. For the Informant : Mrs. Anita Singh, Adv. Mr. Dilip Kumar Adv.

For the State : Mr. Rajendra Nath, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 20-03-2015 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Having regard to the fact that the petitioner faces allegation for offence under Section 304(B), 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and is the husband, this Court, taking into account that the trial has already commenced in which one witness has also been examined, is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The trial court however, is directed to ensure that the trial of the petitioner in connection with Kochas P.S. Case No. 141 of 2012 must be concluded within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order by the Court below.

Since the Informant is being represented by Mrs.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20014 of 2014 (3) dt.20-03-2015 Anita Singh, Advocate it is hereby directed that both the informant as well as the Superintendent of Police, Rohtas will be jointly responsible to ensure production of all the witnesses so that the trial of the petitioner comes to an end within the aforesaid period of six months.

Happens it be that the trial of the petitioner is not concluded within the aforesaid period of six months, the petitioner will have liberty firstly to move trial court which shall then record reasons for not concluding the trial within the period of six months, whereafter, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail before this Court.

It is, also, made clear that since the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the lady, the wife of the petitioner, is actually hiding, liberty is also given to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail directly before this Court itself the moment the petitioner can locate and produce the evidence of his wife being still alive.

With the aforesaid observation and direction this application is disposed of.

(Mihir Kumar Jha, J) Rishi/- U T