Patna High CourtCR. MISC./50933/2023bail rejected

Abhijit Kumar @ Abhijit Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2023-08-17Mr. Justice Chandra Prakash Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50933 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-70 Year-2023 Thana- PAKRIDAYAL District- East Champaran ====================================================== ABHIJIT KUMAR @ ABHIJIT KUMAR SINGH SON OF LATE UPENDRA SINGH R/O-SHREEPUR NAWADA, P.S.-PAKRI DAYAL, DISTT.-EAST CHAMPARAN ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shrinandan Prasad Singh, Adv.

Mr. Anant Kumar Mishra, Adv.

For the Informant :

Mr. Shashi Bhushan Pandey, Adv.

Mr. Rajesh Kumar Verma, Adv.

For the State :

Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 17-08-2023

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove defect (s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of four weeks on resumption of physical mode.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

3. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Pakri Dayal P.S. Case No. 70 of 2023 dated 19.04.2023 registered for the offences punishable u/s 304B read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and the co-accused persons are alleged to have killed the daughter of the informant due to non-fulfillment of demand of four wheeler as

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50933 of 2023(2) dt.17-08-2023 2/2 dowry.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. It is further submitted that petitioner neither tortured nor demanded any dowry from the deceased. Nothing incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 20.04.2023.

6. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner is the husband of the deceased.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as heinous nature of offence and finding no merit in the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge this petitioner, above named, on bail.

8. Learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same preferably within 9 months.

8. The application stands rejected.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Alok Verma/- U T