Patna High CourtCR. MISC./55329/2023bail rejected

Raju Sah @ Sri Ram Sah v. The State Of Bihar

2023-08-31Mr. Justice Chandra Prakash Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55329 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-80 Year-2023 Thana- TARARI District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Raju Sah @ Sri Ram Sah Son Of Jai Ram Sah Resident Village -Dhangaowa, Ward No 10, Ps -Tarari, Dist -Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Kumar Nikhil, Advocate For the Informant :

Mrs. Malti Kumari, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rabindra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 31-08-2023 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.

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 Tarari P.S. Case No. 80 of 2023 dated 08.05.2023 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 hanged the informant's daughter to death due to non-fulfillment of demand of Rs. one lakh as dowry.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55329 of 2023(2) dt.31-08-2023 2/2 that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner neither demanded any dowry nor tortured the deceased. The petitioner is also accused in one more criminal case as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 09.05.2023.

6. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner by submitting that the petitioner is the husband of the deceased. It is further submitted that there is heinous nature of allegation against the petitioner.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the heinous nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail petition of the petitioner stands rejected.

8. The learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same preferably within a period of nine months from the date of receipt of this order to the court concerned.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) guddukr/- U T