Chandan Pandey @ Chandan Kumar Pandey v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.4248 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -45 Year- 2016 Thana -ISHOPUR District- BHAGALPUR ======================================================
1. Chandan Pandey @ Chandan Kumar Pandey, Son of Late Sriram Pandey, Resident of Village- Shrinagar, P.S.- Issipur/Barahat, District- Bhagalpur. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shivjee Pandey For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt. Sucheta Yadav ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 20-02-2017 Heard the parties.
This application is for grant of bail in connection with Issipur, Barahat P.S.Case No.45/2016 for the offence under Sections 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that though the petitioner is husband of the deceased but at the time of occurrence he was not at the house rather he was at the pooling booth of election but on hearing the alarm from his from, he rushed towards his house and tried to set off the fire of the deceased and in that course, he also received injuries. It has also been stated that after death of the deceased, the petitioner called the brother of the deceased and thereafter, he disposed of the deadbody of the deceased. The petitioner is in custody since
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.4248 of 2017 (3) dt.20-02-2017 2/2 14.06.2016.
Heard learned A.P.P. also, who has opposed the prayer of bail and from perusal of the record, it appears that there is allegation of demand of dowry as well as the act of torture against the petitioner and even the police after investigation has submitted charge-sheet against the accused also.
Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage, however, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude it within a period of six months and if not concluded, the petitioner is at liberty to move for bail.
With the aforesaid observation, this application is dismissed.
(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) chn/- U