Mintu Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43810 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-60 Year-2023 Thana- KUSHESHWARASTHAN DistrictDarbhanga ====================================================== Mintu Yadav S/O- Rajgir Yadav Resident of Village- Uda, PS Kusheshwarasthan, District- Darbhanga ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sharma, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 18-10-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 648 of 2023 arising out of Kusheshwarasthan P.S. Case No. 60 of 2023, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304-B, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that sister of informant namely, Chandani Devi was married with this petitioner. The couple has been blessed with two sons aged about 7 years and 3 years respectively. It is alleged that after death of the parents of informant and his sister, this petitioner along with other accused persons started demanding dowry and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43810 of 2024(3) dt.18-10-2024 2/3 due to non-fulfillment of the same, on 06.03.2023, all the accused persons murdered the sister of informant and also concealed her dead body.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case merely on suspicion. Informant is not an eye witness of the case. Allegation is general and omnibus. It is further submitted that only with a view to extort money, this false and concocted case has been lodged. In this case, charge-sheet has already been submitted. Charges have been framed on 05.01.2024, and till date, none of the prosecution witness has been examined. Petitioner is in custody since 13.03.2023.
5. Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State opposed the prayer for bail and submits that it is a case of dowry death. Petitioner is husband of the deceased and there is specific allegation against him that he along with other accused persons used to demand dowry from deceased and due to nonfulfillment of the same, all the accused persons murdered the deceased.
6. Having considered the nature of accusation, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. However, learned Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial preferably within a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43810 of 2024(3) dt.18-10-2024 3/3 period of one year from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) utkarsh/- U T