Suraj Uraon v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22084 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-40 Year-2021 Thana- SIMRA District- West Champaran ====================================================== SURAJ URAON SON OF LALMAN URAON RESIDENT OF VILLAGEHASANPUR, PS- SEMRA (CHIUTAHA), DISTT- WEST CHAMPARAN ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 22-08-2023 Heard the parties.

The petitioner is an accused in connection with S.Tr. No. 157 of 2022 arising out of Semara (Chiutaha) P.S. Case No. 40 of 2021 registered for the offences under sections 304B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code lodged on 12.04.2021 by the informant, Yogendra Uraon.

As per the prosecution story, the marriage of the petitioner with the deceased took place in 2020 but was tortured for dowry and allegation is that on the fateful day, he called the informant and asked about his wife and was informed that she has gone to the forest side for after talking with the petitioner. Later, came to know that she was strangulated to death in the said forest area. Accordingly, the FIR.

It is the case of the petitioner that she was staying at

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22084 of 2023(3) dt.22-08-2023 2/2 her mother's home, someone strangulated in the forest area for which he cannot be held accountable. The last submission is that he is in custody for more than two years and there is no sight of trial being concluded.

Earlier, a case diary was called for by a co-ordinate bench on 19.05.2023, which has since been received. Mr. Bharat Bhushan, learned APP for the State, on the other hand, has gone through the case diary and he has submitted that as per the Post-Mortem Report, the victim girl died of strangulation/ throttling of the neck. Considering the allegation in the FIR which finds supported by the Post-Mortem Report, this Court is not inclined to extend him privilege of bail, which is accordingly rejected. In view of the fact that he is in custody for more than two years, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same within a period of one year from today. (Rajiv Roy, J) Neha/- U T