Rohit Sah @ Rohit Kumar Sah @ Rohit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33428 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-358 Year-2017 Thana- LAURIA District- West Champaran ====================================================== ROHIT SAH @ ROHIT KUMAR SAH @ ROHIT KUMAR Son of Dina Sah, Resident of Village-Barwa Sheikh, P.S-Lauriya, District-West Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Murli Dhar. A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 02-08-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in Sessions Trial No. 47 of 2019 arising out of Lauriya P.S. Case No. 358 of 2017, instituted for the offence under Section(s) 304B, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Petitioner is husband of the deceased.

It is alleged in the written report that informant got information on 23.12.2017 that his daughter has been burnt to death by petitioner and his other family members in her sasural. The informant along with his brother-in-laws (Sala) went to sasural of the daughter and saw her lying dead in completely burnt condition. The accused persons along with co-villagers

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33428 of 2019(4) dt.02-08-2019 2/2 were taking the deceased for cremation. It is further alleged that when informant and his brothers-in-law forbade them from taking away the dead body, the accused persons were ready to assault them. The informant and his brothers-in-law managed to run away.

Report was called for from the court below which has been received. From the report it appears that trial is progressing and till date four witnesses have been examined. As such, the trial has progressed substantially. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

Prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected. The trial court is directed to expedite the trial and make efforts to conclude the same within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order by either fixing the trial on day-to-day basis or by giving short adjournment to the parties. Petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after six months in the event the trial is not concluded within aforesaid period.

(Sanjay Priya, J) S.Ali/- U T