Bhola Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.7544 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -55 Year- 2013 Thana -BARACHATTI District- GAYA ======================================================

1. Bhola Yadav Son of Narayan Yadav Resident of village - Mahulia, P.S. Mohanpur, District - Gaya .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar 1 (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 30-06-2015 Heard the Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ram Chandra Singh, APP for the State.

The husband of the victim is the petitioner who is facing accusations punishable under Section 304B and 201/34 IPC. The father of the victim lodged the case alleging that the daughter was married with the petitioner 6-7 years ago whereafter she was tortured. On 11.2.2013, he heard a rumour and went to the well only to find dead body of his daughter inside the well. The allegation further is that she was being tortured by the husband and other family members.

Contention of the petitioner is that the victim herself escaped from the house and committed suicide. There is no direct eye witness to the occurrence. The petitioner is languishing in

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.7544 of 2015 (3) dt.30-06-2015 2/2 custody since 23.2.2013. The pressure was mounted on him to sell certain lands which was already made.

Learned APP, on the other hand, points out that in the post mortem, the doctor found asphyxia as the cause of death of the victim.

Considering the allegations and the materials available on record, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Prayer is, accordingly, rejected.

However, considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 23.2.2013, liberty is granted to renew his prayer for bail in the Court below itself if all the prosecution witnesses are not examined within eight months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order.

(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) Pankaj/- U T