Tej Bahadur Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19145 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-168 Year-2019 Thana- RAMGARH District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== TEJ BAHADUR SINGH S/o Hari Singh Resident of Village- Mahuar, P.S.- Ramgarh, District- Kaimur (Bhabua).

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Bhaskar Shankar, Adv.

For the State :

Mr. Umanath Mishra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 14-09-2020 Heard learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State, through video conferencing. The petitioner has filed the instant application for grant of regular bail in connection with S.T. No. 297 of 2019 (arising out of Ramgarh P.S. Case No. 168 of 2019 registered under sections 304 B and 120 B of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

As per allegation in the FIR, the daughter of the informant was married to the petitioner in the year 2012. She was tortured for non-fulfilment of demand of dowry. It is stated that all the accused persons burnt his daughter and she died in course of treatment.

It is submitted by learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner that petitioner is the husband of the deceased and

the allegations against the petitioner are false and concocted. It is submitted that the marriage had taken place in June 2012 and the death, more than seven years later in July, 2019. It is submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 14.10.2019. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State who submits that in course of investigation, the statement of the deceased while she was under treatment was recorded in the hospital and she has specially stated about being tortured by her mother-in-law and this petitioner. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the nature of allegations together with the material that has transpired in course of investigation, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and as such, the application for bail is rejected.

The learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. Sushma/- (Partha Sarthy, J) U T