Saroj Sah @ Suraj Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.22153 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -136 Year- 2013 Thana -SAHEBGANJ District- MUZAFFARPUR ====================================================== Saroj Sah @ Suraj Sah Son of Hari Shankar Sah Resident of village - Basudeopur Sarai, P.S. Sahebganj, District - Muzaffarpur. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Hari Kishore Thakur, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : Mr. Subhash Chandra Mishra (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 16-07-2015 The petitioner is languishing in custody since 23.03.2015 in connection with Sahebganj P.S. Case No. 136 of 2013 for the offences instituted under Sections 304(B)/34 of the I.P.C. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that the daughter of the informant Anjali Devi was married with the petitioner three years ago and after marriage, the daughter of the informant went to her Sasural where motorcycle and Rs. 50,000/- were demanded by the accused persons including the petitioner by way of additional dowry and on non-fulfilment of their demand they used to torture her. The informant had subsequently given motorcycle to the petitioner for saving the life of his daughter but behaviour of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.22153 of 2015 (2) dt.16-07-2015 2/2 the petitioner did not change. The accused persons always ill treated the daughter of the informant and on 23.06.2013 the informant came to know that the accused persons have committed murder of the daughter of the informant by assaulting and hanging her and dead body has been concealed.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 23.03.2015. It is further submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case and the matter has already been settled between the parties. On behalf of the State it has been submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and he is the husband of the deceased.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The same is rejected in Sahebganj P.S. Case No. 136/2013, pending in the court of the learned SDJM, West, Muzaffarpur. Anyhow, the court below is directed to conclude the trial within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order as it has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the matter has been settled between the parties.

U.K./- (Sudhir Singh, J) U T