← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./2753/2017rejected

Chunnu Chaudhary @ Chunnu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2017-03-15Mr. Justice Birendra Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.2753 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -64 Year- 2015 Thana -JANDAHA District- VAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ====================================================== Chunnu Chaudhary @ Chunnu Kumar son Jai Chaudhary .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bela Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 15-03-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Petitioner is languishing in custody in connection with Jandaha P.S. Case No. 64 of 2015 (S.T. No.117 of 2016) for the offences punishable under Sections 498A/364/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the D.P. Act pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Vaishali.

The petitioner is husband of the victim girl Guddi Kumari. Guddi Kumari was married with the petitioner in the year 2010. Allegation is that the petitioner committed murder of Guddi Kumari for non-fulfilment of the dowry demand and disposed of the dead body.

Submission of the petitioner is that petitioner is in custody since 23.11.2015. Charge has already been framed in

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.2753 of 2017 (3) dt.15-03-2017 2/2 this case. However, no prosecution witness is examined up till now.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The bail prayer of the petitioner is refused at this stage. If the trial is not concluded within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the petitioner may renew the prayer for bail. The learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and in no circumstance unnecessary adjournment be allowed in this case since the petitioner is in custody for more than one year. (Birendra Kumar, J) Mkr./- U T