Raju Bharti @ Jhunna v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17734 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-43 Year-2016 Thana- KACCHWA District- Rohtas ====================================================== RAJU BHARTI @ JHUNNA, aged about 42 years, Gender-Male, Son of Late Ramchandra Sah @ Late Ram Chandra Saw, Resident of Village - Khiriyawan, P.S.- Kachhwa, District - Rohtas. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr.Bhaskar Shankar, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party :

Mr.Anil Kumar Singh No. 1, A.P.P ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 14-12-2020 Due to COVID-19 Pandemic, the matter is being taken up by way of virtual Court proceeding.

The matter has been listed under the heading 'For Orders' under the orders of Hon'ble the Chief Justice. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case for the offence registered under Sections 304(B), 341 and 323/34 of the I.P.C. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the accused persons including the petitioner killed the victim due to nonfulfilment of demand of dowry. Earlier bail applications of the petitioner were rejected vide Cr. Misc. No. 57713 of 2017 under order dated 12.12.2017 and Cr. Misc. No. 15562 of 2019 under order dated 10.04.2019, annexed as Annexure-1 series to the present application taking into account that the petitioner is the husband of the deceased

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17734 of 2020(3) dt.14-12-2020 2/2 and the onus is on him to explain the cause of death of the deceased. It is a case of dowry death.

This is third attempt on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail.

A report was called for from the learned court below regarding the present stage of the case. It has been reported that seven prosecution witnesses have already been examined and the case is fixed for argument by the defence side. The case is likely to be concluded within a period of three months. Considering the nature of accusation and the stage of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The same is rejected in connection with Sessions Trial No. 268/2017, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-XV, Rohtas at Sasaram.

Learned court below is directed to take all necessary steps to conclude the trial at the earliest preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

(Sudhir Singh, J) U.K./- U T