Guddu Sah @ Ashutosh Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58160 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-383 Year-2022 Thana- CHANPATIA District- West Champaran ====================================================== Guddu Sah @ Ashutosh Sah Son Of Mohan Sah Village- Chuhari PsChanpatia Dist-West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Akhileshwar Kumar Shrivastva, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Pushpa Sinha.1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 27-02-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Chanpatia P.S. Case No. 383/2022, lodged on 26.07.2022der Section 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the FIR has been lodged against the present petitioner and his other family members alleging that all the accused persons have killed the daughter of the informant for non-fulfillment of dowry demand.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. The allegation levelled in the FIR is false. In fact, it is not a case of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58160 of 2023(7) dt.27-02-2024 2/3 murder rather it is a simple case of suicide as narrated in paragraph 8 of the petition after going through the Whatsapp chat of the victim, the petitioner came to know that her wife had a pre-marital relationship with a boy of her village and when the petitioner started protesting about her illegal activities, then she committed suicide. The petitioner is in custody since 27.09.2022 having a clean antecedent. The chargesheet has already been filed.

5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail.

6. Upon specific query from the counsel for the petitioner whether the charge has been framed or not, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that vide order dated 06.09.203, a report was called for which has been received and the report suggests that the charge has not been framed till date.

7. In the present facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner in connection with Chanpatia P.S. Case No. 383/2022, pending before the learned CJM, Bettiah at West Champaran is hereby rejected.

9. However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58160 of 2023(7) dt.27-02-2024 3/3 bail after 9 months of framing of the charge.

10. With this observation, the bail application stands disposed off.

(Dr. Anshuman, J) Ashwini/- U T