Prince Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.22276 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -273 Year- 2015 Thana -KARAHGAR District- SASARAM (ROHTAS) ======================================================
1. Prince Singh S/o Kameshwar Singh resident of village - Sakhuan ( Karup ), P.S. Kargahar, District - Rohtas .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bhaskar Shankar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Yogendra Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 05-07-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. representing the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Kargahar P.S. Case No. 273 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304(B), 201 and 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Kumari Priya Singh was married to the petitioner on 11.05.2013 and allegedly, due to non-fulfillment of demand of car by way of dowry, she was being tortured and assaulted and ultimately, she was killed and her dead body was also cremated. There was blood stain on bed cover.
Submission is of false implication and that the wife of the petitioner was short tamper lady, there was cordial relation
between the petitioner and his wife, out of the wedlock a son was born. Due to some petty dispute the wife of the petitioner committed suicide by hanging herself, the I.O. has not found any sign of blood on the bed cover, independent witnesses, namely, Sanjay Kumar Singh, Munmun Singh and Anil Kumar Singh vide para 12, 13 and 78 of the case diary have stated that the deceased committed suicide by hanging herself and further in para 79 it has come that cremation was done in presence of the father, brother and other family members of the deceased and later on, the informant lodged this false case. Co-accused Kameshawar Singh has been allowed pre-arrest bail vide Cri. Misc. No. 6368 of 2016 and, as such, the petitioner also deserves sympathetic consideration as he is suffering in custody since 19.10.2015. Chargesheet has already been submitted and there is no chance of tampering with the prosecution evidence.
The learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer of bail. In the facts and circumstances stated above, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M. 2, Sasaram, Distt. Rohtas in connection with Kargahar P.S. Case No. 273 of 2015 subject to the conditions that one of the
bailors must be near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail.
(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) sushma/- U T