Patna High CourtCR. MISC./30971/2016dismissed

Satendra Rai @ Satyendra Rai v. The State Of Bihar

2016-09-14Mr. Justice Sudhir Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.30971 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -81 Year- 2015 Thana -AMNAUR District- SARAN ====================================================== Satendra Rai @ Satyendra Rai S/O- Bhagwan Rai, R/O- Khaspatti P.OBaldihan, P.S Amnour, Distt- Saran .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Chandra Shekhar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Smt. Pronati Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 14-09-2016 Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and the State. The Petitioner seeks bail in Amnour P.S. case No.81 of 2015 instituted for the offence under Sections 304(B) and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of Sri Amrendra Prasad, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Chapra. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the informant's sister, namely, Suganti Devi was married with the petitioner five years ago. After the marriage the accused persons including the petitioner started torturing and assaulting his sister due to nonfulfilment of dowry and ultimately they committed her murder and disappeared her dead body.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 21.8.2015 and the charge sheet has

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.30971 of 2016 (3) dt.14-09-2016 2/2 been submitted in the present case. The petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. There is no eye witness to the alleged occurrence. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. There is no substantive evidence to suggest the implication of the petitioner in the present case. On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and he is the husband of the deceased. The onus is upon the petitioner to explain the cause of death of the deceased.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The same is rejected. The Court below is directed to take all necessary steps to expedite the trial.

(Sudhir Singh, J) Narendra/- U T