Sanjay Rajbhar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.30689 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -47 Year- 2015 Thana -BUXAR MUFFSIL District- BUXAR ======================================================

1. Sanjay Rajbhar Son of Batohi Rajbhar resident of village - Rajpur Dera, Police Station - Rajpur, District - Buxar .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. D.P.Tiwary(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 04-01-2016 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned A.P.P.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case for the offence punishable under section 302 of the I.P.C and section 3⁄4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

The petitioner was married with Dhano Devi, the daughter of the informant, but he used to torture her for dowry and out of the wedlock there are two daughters and one son and three months ago from the date of occurrence the petitioner ousted Dhano Devi resulting she was living in her Naihar with the informant and three days ago the petitioner went there and started living with her and in absence of the informant and his wife the petitioner killed Dhano Devi by cutting her neck with Garasi.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.30689 of 2015 (8) dt.04-01-2016 2/2 Submission is of false implication and that there is no eye witness of the occurrence, the petitioner never went at the house of the informant and he has been falsely implicated resulting he is suffering in custody since 02.03.2015. The learned A.P.P. opposes prayer for bail by submitting that the informant and other witnesses have supported the prosecution version and during postmortem also the prosecution version has been found substantiated. In the facts and circumstances as stated above, considering the allegation attributed against the petitioner, heinous in nature, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and accordingly his such prayer stands rejected in connection with S. Tr. No. 120 of 2015 arising out of Buxar (M) P.S. Case No. 47 of 2015 pending in the court of A.D.J- 6th, Buxar. However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and to conclude the same preferably within nine months. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) Abhay/- U T