Siju Sada v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17120 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-75 Year-2021 Thana- SURSAND District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== SIJU SADA Son of Kisna Sada R/o village - Radhaur Mushari Tola Ward No.- 4, P.S.- Sursand, Dist.- Sitamarhi.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Santosh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Binod Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 27-06-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The instant application for regular bail has been filed by the petitioner in connection with Sursand P.S. Case no. 75 of 2021 instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per allegation in the FIR, petitioner along with his family members had tortured in various ways to the daughter of the informant due to non-fulfillment of dowry demand and ultimately she was being killed by strangulating. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is husband of the deceased and has been falsely implicated in this case. Deceased died accidentally due to some ailment. He never demanded any thing from the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17120 of 2023(3) dt.27-06-2023 2/2 deceased and her family members. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and languishing in judicial custody since 11.01.2023.

Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer of Bail and submitted that during investigation, several witnesses have supported the prosecution story. As per postmortem report, which is mentioned in para 18 of the case diary, doctor has opined cause of death due to asphyxia leading to CR failure as a result of hanging produced by rope like substance.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

The trial court is directed to expedite and conclude the trial within a period of six months.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) sushma/- U