← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./30554/2023rejected

Sahdeo Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

2023-12-02Mr. Justice Sunil Kumar Panwar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30554 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-388 Year-2021 Thana- ROSERA District- Samastipur ====================================================== Sahdeo Sharma ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Shailendra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 02-12-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in a case instituted for the offence under Sections 498A, 304B, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The allegation against the petitioner along with others is of killing the daughter of the informant, due to non-fulfillment of further dowry demand.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He has committed no offence. Petitioner is the husband of the deceased. He submitted that there is no consistent evidence and no eyewitness of the alleged occurrence. Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 27.08.2022.

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30554 of 2023(7) dt.02-12-2023 2/2 application for bail and submitted that petitioner is named in the FIR and husband of the deceased. He submitted that the sole responsibility of taking care of deceased is against her husband/petitioner but he did not do so. He further submitted that the Postmortem report has also corroborated the prosecution case. During investigation several witnesses have also supported the prosecution case.

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

7. The trial Court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Arish/- U T