Patna High CourtCR. MISC./60660/2017rejected

Fekhan Ray @ Fekan Rai v. The State Of Bihar

2018-01-25Mr. Justice Arun Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.60660 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -18 Year- 2016 Thana -VIDYAPATINAGAR District- SAMASTIPUR ======================================================

1. Fekhan Ray @ Fekan Rai, Son of Kameshwar Ray, resident of VillageGopalpur Lodhiyahi, P.S.- Vidyapati Nagar, District- Samastipur. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anshu Dhar Sharma, Advolcatge For the Opposite Party/s : Smt Pushpa Sinha, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 25-01-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Petitioner, already in custody, seeks bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 58 of 2017 arising out of Vidyapati Nagar P. S. Case No. 18 of 2016, registered under Sections 304 (B) and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case is that the deceased was tortured for dowry and done to death by the petitioner (husband of the deceased) along with others and the dead body was also disposed of discreetly without giving information to her parents. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that she died due to appendicitis and was treated by the doctor and the petitioner is in custody since 02.12.2016 and charge has been framed on

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.60660 of 2017 (3) dt.25-01-2018 2/2 04.04.2017.

However, the learned counsel for the State submits that from the case diary, there is no any disclosure that the petitioner's wife treated by any doctor rather the dead body was disposed of after killing her within one and half years of marriage. Having considered the said facts and circumstances, the petitioner, Fekhan Ray @ Fekan Rai, who is the husband of the deceased, I find no reason to reconsider the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected in connection with Sessions Trial No. 58 of 2017 arising out of Vidyapatinagar P. S. Case No. 18/2016 from the court of learned Sessions Judge, Samastipur.

(Arun Kumar, J) Sudha/- U T