Chintu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.25833 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -17 Year- 2016 Thana -DEEPNAGAR District- NALANDA (BIHARSHARIFF) ====================================================== Chintu Kumar son of Late Bharat Mahato, Resident of Village- Viyabani, P.S. Deepnagar, District Nalanda .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Prakash Chandra Agrawal, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Manoj Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 17-08-2016 Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and the State. The Petitioner seeks bail in Deep Nagar P.S. case No.17 of 2016 instituted for the offence under Sections 304(B) and 328/34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bihar Sharif, Nalanda.

Allegation against the petitioner is that he along with other family members tortured and killed the daughter of the informant for non-fulfilment of demand of dowry. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 28.01.2016 and the charge sheet has been submitted in the present case. The petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25833 of 2016 (3) dt.17-08-2016 2/2 witnesses against the petitioner. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. There is no eye witness to the alleged occurrence. Petitioner was not present at the time of occurrence.

On behalf of the State and learned counsel for the informant, it is submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. He is the husband of the deceased. Onus is upon him to explain the death of the deceased, who happens to be his wife. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The same is rejected. The Court below is directed to take all necessary steps to expedite the trial.

(Sudhir Singh, J) Narendra/- U T