Manju Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24511 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-153 Year-2018 Thana- DINARA District- Rohtas ====================================================== MANJU DEVI W/o Dhan Jee Sah Resident of Village-Kori, P.S.-Dinara (Bhanas O.P), District-Rohtas at Sasaram. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Babu Nandan Prasad, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dilip Kumar No.1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 02-11-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State through virtual Court proceedings. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case, in brief, is that the sister of the informant was burn to death along with her two months old baby by the petitioner in association of other family members. The reason behind the occurrence is said to be that the petitioner is the first wife of brother-in-law of the informant. The petitioner along with her husband always used to torment the deceased.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. She has been falsely implicated in this case as she is the first wife of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24511 of 2020(3) dt.02-11-2020 2/2 husband of the deceased. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. The petitioner has been languishing in custody since 24.05.2018.

A report was called for vide order dated 22.09.2020 regarding the stage of the trial and the time likely to be taken in conclusion of the trial. The same has been received, which is kept at Flag 'R', in which it is stated that out of eight witnesses, seven witnesses have been examined and the learned Trial Court sought two months more time to conclude the trial. Learned APP for the State opposed the bail petition. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for bail is hereby rejected.

However, the learned Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible preferably within three months and both the parties are directed to extend their cooperation for concluding the trial within the stipulated period. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U T