Yugeshwar Sahni @ Ugeshwar Sahni v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.24403 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -62 Year- 2017 Thana -SAMASTIPUR MUFFASIL DistrictSAMASTIPUR ====================================================== Yugeshwar Sahni @ Ugeshwar Sahni son of Late Ugrah Sahni resident of village - Laguniya, Bagahi Tola, P.S. - Muffasil, District - Samastipur. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Surya Narayan Roy, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajendra Singh Shastriji, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 13-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.
Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 10.02.2017 in connection with Samastipur Muffasil P.S. Case No. 62 of 2017 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The prosecution case, as lodged by the informant is that, his daughter Kajal Kumari was married to the petitioner's son Vinod Sahani in the year 2016 and both the petitioner and Vinod Sahani used to torture his daughter for non-fulfilment of demand of dowry and have killed her by hanging her.
It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.24403 of 2017 (3) dt.13-07-2017 2/3 petitioner that he is innocent, has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case and that charge-sheet has already been submitted, hence, there is no chance of tampering with the prosecution evidence. It is further submitted that the prosecution witnesses have stated that 3-4 days back, the deceased had a quarrel with her husband Vinod Sahani, as she used to talk on mobile for long hours with her brother-in-law and the husband had snatched the mobile. He submits that there was no demand of dowry and except the allegation made by the informant, there is no other material on record implicating the petitioner.
However, learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances and the materials on record, let the petitioner above named be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. Ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-V, Samastipur in connection with Samastipur Muffasil P.S. Case No. 62 of 2017, subject to the condition that petitioner will cooperate with the trial and appear before the learned Court below during trial on each and every date and failure to appear before the learned Court below on
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.24403 of 2017 (3) dt.13-07-2017 3/3 two consecutive dates without assigning any reason will entail cancellation of his bail bonds.
(Nilu Agrawal, J.) Arjun/- U T