← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./5654/2019rejected

Paltu Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

2019-04-22Mr. Justice Birendra Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5654 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-394 Year-2013 Thana- HILSA District- Nalanda ====================================================== PALTU SHARMA, Son of Late Suresh Thakur, Resident of Name Tola, Mathiyapur, P.S. - Hilsa, District - Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Manoj Kumar Pandey For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rita Verma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 22-04-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304B and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Daughter of the informant was married with the petitioner four years prior to her unnatural death. There is allegation of demand of dowry and torture for the same. The dead body was allegedly disposed of without information to the parents of the deceased or to the police.

Submission is that there is delay of three days in lodging of the FIR. There is no direct evidence against the petitioner. The informant had already knowledge of the occurrence of 16.09.2013 itself. However, the FIR was lodged on 19.09.2018.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5654 of 2019(3) dt.22-04-2019 2/2 Considering the presumption of law against the petitioner and conduct in disposal of the dead body without information to the police or the parents coupled with the allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Hilsa Police Station Case No. 394 of 2013 pending in the court of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Hilsa, Nalanda.

Hence, prayer for bail is refused.

Learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same preferably within a period of nine months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, failing which the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail before the learned court below itself. (Birendra Kumar, J) Kundan/- U T