Patna High CourtCR. MISC./24987/2020rejected

Sunil Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2021-02-17Mr. Justice Arvind Srivastava2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24987 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-74 Year-2018 Thana- SASARAM MUFFSIL District- Rohtas ====================================================== SUNIL KUMAR Son of Lalan Singh Resident of Village- Ragho Dihara, Police Station- Suryapura, District- Rohtas at Sasaram, at Present MohallaBeda Redio Station (infront of ) of Police Station- Sasaram (M), DistrictRohtas at Sasaram. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Raghunandan Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.A.G.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 17-02-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 72 of 2019 arising out of Sasaram (M) P.S. Case No. 74 of 2018 for the offence under Sections 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 3⁄4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, who is of clean antecedent, is innocent and has not committed any offence. In fact, the petitioner happens to be husband of the deceased and he has falsely been implicated in this case. Neither the petitioner has assaulted the deceased nor he demanded any

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24987 of 2020(5) dt.17-02-2021 2/2 dowry from the deceased in any manner. The unfortunate petitioner is rotting in judicial custody since 08.07.2018. Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the petitioner is the husband of the deceased and he killed his wife due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. Prosecution witnesses have also supported the prosecution version.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of this petitioner is rejected. However, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude it preferably within a period of six months from the date of this order.

(Arvind Srivastava, J) brajesh/- U T