Shambhu Das v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.28742 of 2016 Arising out of PS.Case No. -70 Year- 2015 Thana -SONO District- JAMUI ====================================================== Shambhu Das, son of Late Satyanarayan Das, resident of Village Harawa Pahari, P.S. Sono, District Jamui.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sinha, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : Mr. Ram Sevak Choudhary, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 01-09-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner is languishing in custody since 11.02.2016 in connection with Sono P.S. Case No. 70 of 2015 (G.R. No. 725 of 2015) for the offences instituted under Sections 304(B)/34 of the IPC.

It is alleged that the marriage of the informant's daughter was solemnized with this petitioner in the year 2012. After marriage, her in-laws started demanding money from the informant. The informant wanted to pacify the dispute. It is further alleged that when the informant's daughter heard about her that she has illicit relationship with her Dewar, Lalan Ravidas, sprinkled the kerosene oil upon her body and set fire.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.28742 of 2016 (3) dt.01-09-2016 2/2 It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 11.02.2016 and the charge sheet has been submitted in the present case. There is no allegation of tampering of the witnesses alleged against the petitioner. He has got no criminal antecedent. He has falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioner was not present on the alleged date of occurrence. As per prosecution itself, it is a case for the offence under Section 306 of the IPC.

On behalf of the State it has been submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and he is the husband of the deceased. The onus upon him to explain the death of the deceased. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The same is rejected in Sono P.S. Case No. 70 of 2015(G.R. No. 725 of 2015), pending in the court of the learned A.C.J.M., Jamui. The court below is directed to take all necessary steps to expedite and conclude the trial preferably within a period of one year from the date of receipt/production of copy of the order.

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