Rama Shankar Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.44897 of 2014 (3) dt.28-01-2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.44897 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -117 Year- 2011 Thana -BANIAPUR District- SARAN ====================================================== RAMA SHANKAR SHARMA, SON OF MISRILAL SHARMA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- DHAWARI, P.S. BANIAPUR, DISTRICTSARAN. .... .... PETITIONER.

VERSUS

THE STATE OF BIHAR.

.... .... OPPOSITE PARTY.

====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Renuka Ratnakar(APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 28-01-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner is accused in connection with S. Tr. No. 608 of 2013 arising out of Beniapur P.S. Case No. 117 of 2011 registered under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. A report regarding the present stage of trial has been received through letter no. 8 dated 12.01.2015, from the court of Additional District and Sessions Judge-IX, Chapra at Saran, which shows that out of ten charge sheeted witnesses, six witnesses have already been examined and summon has already been sent to the Doctor and Investigating Officer for their examination and the trial is expected to be concluded very soon.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.44897 of 2014 (3) dt.28-01-2015 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that prayer for bail of the petitioner, who is the husband of the deceased, Rita Devi, was earlier rejected on merit vide order dated 19.03.2014 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 34476 of 2013 by this Court and he is in custody since 05.06.2013. It is further submitted that marriage of deceased, Rita Devi, sister of informant, was performed with the petitioner in the year 1995 and she committed suicide by hanging herself due to quarrel in the family. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, I find no ground to reconsider the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. However, the trial court is directed to conclude the trial of the petitioner within six months by taking all effective steps. If the trial of the petitioner is not concluded within aforesaid period of six months, the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Bhardwaj/- U T