Mukesh Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.4716 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -125 Year- 2015 Thana -JHANJHARPUR District- MADHUBANI ====================================================== Mukesh Thakur S/O- Bacha Thakur, resident of village- Araria Sangram, P.S.- Jhanjharpur, District- Madhubani .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nasim Nazar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Ansural Haque (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 29-03-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. representing the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Jhanjharpur P.S. Case No. 125 of 2015 registered for the offence punishable under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code. Allegedly, Arti Devi the daughter of the informant was married to the petitioner and Arti Devi did not pass matriculation examination resulting the petitioner started taunting and assaulting her and ultimately the petitioner burnt her to death. Submission is of false implication and that no date and time of marriage and further regarding the occurrence, has been given in the First Information Report, the informant has lodged this false case and there is no allegation of demanding dowry,

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.4716 of 2016 (3) dt.29-03-2016 2/2 chargesheet has been submitted under Section 302 IPC and, as such, the petitioner who is suffering in custody since 06.08.2015, deserves sympathetic consideration to which the learned A.P.P. opposes by submitting that the petitioner forcibly brought the daughter of the informant and killed her and further tried to set her on fire. The doctor has found cause of death due to asphyxia caused by strangulation.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering the allegation attributed against the petitioner, serious in nature, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and accordingly, his such prayer stands rejected. However, considering the detention of the petitioner, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as early as possible, preferably within a period of six months.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) sushma/- U T