Patna High CourtCR. MISC./7977/2017dismissed

Saroj Kumar Singh @ Saroj Ku. Singh @ Suraj Kumar Singh v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2017-02-23Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.7977 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -280 Year- 2015 Thana -KUDRA District- BHABHUA (KAIMUR) ======================================================

1. SAROJ KUMAR SINGH @ SAROJ KU. SINGH @ SURAJ KUMAR SINGH, Son of Late Raj Kishore Singh, Resident of village - Reriya, P.S. Kargahar, District - Rohtas .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Anjana Kumari, Wife of Saroj Kumar Singh, Daughter of Harihar Choudhary, At Present Resident of village - Sondihara, P.S. Bhabua, District - Kaimur ( Bhabua ) .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kumar Sunil For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Asharaf Ansari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 23-02-2017 Heard the parties.

This application is for grant of bail in connection with Kudra P.S. Case No.280 of 2015 for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 307, 498-A, 379, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner was ready for one time settlement. At the last time also, during the time of grant of anticipatory bail, the plea was taken that the matter will be settled in the Mediation Centre, as such the matter was referred to the Mediation Centre and thereafter the anticipatory bail application was disposed of and the petitioner surrendered. Now the petitioner is in custody for about two

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.7977 of 2017 (2) dt.23-02-2017 2/2 months.

Heard learned A.P.P. and the learned counsel for the informant. The learned counsel for the informant has submitted that prior to that a case was also lodged in this connection and after mediation, the informant was sent to live with the petitioner and thereafter the petitioner kept the informant in the Hotel and subjected to her torture and also tried to strangulate her. There are injuries on the neck of the informant also, as such the petitioner is not entitled for bail.

Having heard both sides. In view of the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage, however, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial . With the aforesaid observation, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) chn/- U