Lalo Yadav @ Rajesh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37181 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-321 Year-2018 Thana- BHARGAMA District- Araria ====================================================== LALO YADAV @ RAJESH YADAV Son of Prakash Yadav Resident of Village- Lakshminiya, Pakpar, Ward No. 13, P.S.- Bhargama, District- Araria. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sudhanshu Shekhar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Priya Sharan Singh, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 14-08-2019 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in Bhargama P.S. Case No. 321 of 2018, instituted for offence under Sections 304B/34 I.P.C.

It is alleged by the informant in his written report that, first daughter of the informant namely, Rakhi Devi was married with Lalo Yadav @ Rajesh Kumar according to Hindu rite and custom and has a son aged about 4 years. It is alleged that three years prior to the occurrence, the petitioner has solemnized second marriage with the second daughter of the informant after eloping with her. It is alleged that the petitioner tortured first wife in her Sasural. The informant received information at 7 A.M. on 12.12.2018 that his second daughter has been killed by the accused persons and are trying to disappear her dead body.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37181 of 2019(4) dt.14-08-2019 2/2 The informant reached the Sasural of her daughter then saw that dead body of his daughter was lying and there was mark of assault on her body.

Counsel for state has submitted that post-mortem report shows that the deceased died due to assault by the accused persons.

Accordingly, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. Hence, prayer for bail of petitioner is rejected.

The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and make efforts to conclude the same within nine months from the date of receipt of copy of order.

Petitioner is given liberty to renew prayer for bail in the event trial is not concluded within aforesaid period. (Sanjay Priya, J) kamlesh/- U T