Sumant Parwat @ Sumant Kumar Parvat v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49829 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-20 Year-2023 Thana- SIWAN MUFFASIL District- Siwan ====================================================== Sumant Parwat @ Sumant Kumar Parvat Son of Vinod Parwat Resident of village - Siyari Mathiya, P.S.- Siwan Muffasil, Distt.- Siwan ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Y.C. Verma, Sr. Advocate Ms. Kumari Anupam, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Upendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 29-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail in connection with Siwan Mufassil P.S.Case no. 20 of 2023 registered under sections 304B, 498A, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, the daughter of the informant who was married to the petitioner herein was assaulted and tortured for nonfulfilment of demand of dowry by way of a motorcar. The informant states that his daughter
2/4 communicated about the torture on mobile phone. She was finally done to death and her body cremated.
4. Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case only for the reason of his being the husband of the deceased. The earlier prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 30.08.2024 (Annexure-1) passed in Cr. Misc. no. 48039 of 2024, directing the learned Court below to expedite the trial. Inspite of the petitioner having remained in custody since 18.01.2023, there is no progress whatsoever in the learned trial Court and no chance of the trial concluding in the near future. In reference to the deposition of P.W. 2 Sudhir Kumar Puri examined in course of trial and deposition of whom has been brought on record as Annexure- 2 to the petition it is submitted that the witness has stated in paragraph no. 9 of the deposition that it was as a result of illness that the daughter of the informant died. Information was given to her parents' place and they had participated in the cremation. The petitioner undertakes to cooperate in the trial on his release on bail.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State. He submits that P.W. 2, the witness on whom reliance is being placed by learned Senior counsel appearing for
3/4 the petitioner, was declared hostile. Even in cross-examination in paragraph no. 5, it is stated that with the intention to destroy the evidence that the cremation of the deceased had been carried out by the accused persons. On receiving information from the villagers and on going to his sister's place, no one was to be found there.
6. A report was called for from the learned trial Court. As per report received contained in letter dated 5.8.2025, out of the seven prosecution witnesses, two witnesses have been examined and discharged while the examination-in-chief of one more witness has taken place. Four witnesses remain to be examined.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations against the petitioner in the FIR, the petitioner being the husband of the deceased and the trial having proceeded the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.
8. Taking into consideration the petitioner having remained in custody for more than 2 years 6 months since 18.1.2023, liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail in six months, if there is no substantial progress in the trial.
4/4
9. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned trial Court.
(Partha Sarthy, J) Sauravkrsinha/ BibhashU T