Ranveer Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16787 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-99 Year-2017 Thana- BAKHTIARPUR District- Saharsa ====================================================== RANVEER YADAV, aged about 35 years, Gender-Male, Son of Ram Bahadur Yadav, Resident of Village- Belbara, Tola- Matkhora, O.P.- Kaneria, P.S.- Bakhtiarpur, District- Saharsa.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mr.Ashok Kumar, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party :
Mr.Narendra Kumar Singh, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 24-04-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner is languishing in custody since 10.09.2018 in a case for the offence registered under Sections 304(B)/34 of the IPC and 3⁄4 of the D.P. Act. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the informant received information on 27.04.17 in the morning by an unknown person telling that his sister has died. Thereafter, he rushed to the matrimonial home of his sister where he found dead body and thereon alleged that Ranveer Yadav (petitioner), Raj Kumar Yadav, Ram Bahadur Yadav, Sita Devi and Hema Kumari have caused the incident conspiring together and due to non-fulfilment of dowry demand they caused death of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16787 of 2019(3) dt.24-04-2019 2/3 informant's sister, namely, Amrika Devi by strangulation. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. Charge sheet has been submitted in the present case. There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioner. There is no substantive evidence to suggest the implication of the petitioner in the present case. On behalf of the learned counsel for the State, it has been submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. He is the husband of the deceased. The onus is on him to explain the cause of death of the deceased. The allegation made in the F.I.R. is corroborated by the postmortem report.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The same is rejected in connection with Bakhtiarpur P.S. Case No. 99 of 2017, pending in the court of learned C.J.M. Saharsa. The court below is directed to take all necessary steps to conclude the trial preferably within a period of one year from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order. The District Magistrate, Saharsa and the Superintendent of Police, Saharsa, are also directed to ensure that the prosecution witnesses are produced in the court below
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16787 of 2019(3) dt.24-04-2019 3/3 on the date fixed by the court below so that the trial could be concluded within the stipulated period.
Let a copy of this order be communicated to the District Magistrate, Saharsa and the Superintendent of Police, Saharsa.
(Sudhir Singh, J) U.K./- U T