Patna High CourtCR. MISC./43977/2016rejected

Yadu Sahani @ Jadu Sahani v. The State Of Bihar

2017-01-23Mr. Justice Birendra Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.43977 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -439 Year- 2015 Thana -MOTIHARI MUFASIL DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI), pending in the Court of CJM, Motihari, East Champaran. ======================================================

1. Yadu Sahani @ Jadu Sahani son of Yogendra Sahani resident of Village - Jhitkahiya, P.S. - Lakhaura, District - East Champaran. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar -2, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 23-01-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Petitioner is languishing in custody in connection with Motihari Muffasil (Lakhaura) P.S. Case No. 439 of 2015 for the offences punishable under Sections 304B/498A/323/504/386 of the Indian Penal Code.

Petitioner is husband of the victim. Allegation is that the victim girl, daughter of the informant, was done to death for non-fulfilment of demand of dowry within two years of her marriage. The case-diary would reveal that some other witnesses had also supported the accusation of demand of dowry and torture for the same soon before her death.

Submission of the petitioner is that after

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.43977 of 2016 (4) dt.23-01-2017 2/2 investigation police has submitted charge sheet under Sections 498A and 364 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3⁄4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act as some other witnesses have submitted that the victim had left matrimonial house without informing anyone. The petitioner is in custody since 12.08.2016. Considering the nature of accusation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail for the present. The bail prayer of the petitioner is refused. The learned Court-below is directed to expedite the trial. (Birendra Kumar, J) Mkr./- U T