Mahesh Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.28701 of 2015 (3) dt.30-10-2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.28701 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -33 Year- 2011 Thana -SAKRA District- MUZAFFARPUR ======================================================

1. Mahesh Paswan Son of Shankar Paswan R/o Village - Rampur Bakhari, P.S. - Sakra, District - Muzaffarpur.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Alok Kumar Alok For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Raj Kishore Singh(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 30-10-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. representing the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sakra P.S. Case No. 33 of 2011 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304(B), 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner was married on 29.04.2009 to Pawan Kumari, the daughter of the informant, due to non-fulfillment of demand of colour T.V. and gold chain by way of dowry, she was subjected to cruelty and ultimately she was murdered and without informing the informant, her dead body was cremated. Submission is of false implication and that the wife of the petitioner died natural death due to diarrhea and the informant also participated in cremation but for lust of money, lodged the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.28701 of 2015 (3) dt.30-10-2015 present case with false allegation. The petitioner is suffering in custody since 29.04.2015. The case has been compromised and compromise petition has already been filed in the court below and, as such, he deserves sympathetic consideration to which the learned A.P.P. opposes by submitting that the witnesses during investigation have supported the prosecution case. In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering the allegation attributed against the petitioner which finds support during investigation also, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and accordingly, such prayer stands rejected.

However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as early as possible preferably within three months.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) sushma/- U