Dilip Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26463 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-243 Year-2019 Thana- BIHARIGANJ District- Madhepura ====================================================== DILIP SHARMA Son of Bechan Sharma Resident of Village- Rahta, Chaumukh, P.S.- Bihariganj, District- Madhepura. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Surya Narayan Yadav, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mrs. Sharda Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 04-12-2020 Heard Mr. Surya Narayan Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Sharda Kumari, Additional Public Prosecutor for the state through video conferencing.

2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Bihariganj PS Case No. 243/2019 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 304(B), 201/34 of the IPC.

3. The allegation, as per First Information Report, is that the daughter of the informant was married to the petitioner and the informant got the information through the villagers that his daughter has been killed by the petitioner and other family members.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence in the manner alleged and the deceased has died of chronic disease and referring to Annexure-2, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26463 of 2020(4) dt.04-12-2020 2/2 doctor has issued a certificate showing that the petitioner took all care for the treatment of the victim.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State, referring to the case diary, submits that all the witnesses have supported the prosecution story that the daughter of the informant was killed by the petitioner by assaulting her on her head when she refused to cook the fish brought by the petitioner on an auspicious occasion of Somwari (Monday). Learned counsel further submits that the dead body of the victim was disposed of secretly by the accused person and his family members. As such, postmortem could not be done.

6. Having regard to the submissions made by the parties and taking into consideration the material on record, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner at this stage. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected.

7. However, petitioner, if so advised, may renew his prayer for bail after one year from today, if the trial does not record any progress.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) perwez U T