Raja Ram Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45589 of 2015 (3) dt.07-01-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.45589 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -190 Year- 2014 Thana -ROSERA District- SAMASTIPUR ======================================================

1. Raja Ram Sahni Son of Shankar Sahni Resident of village - Rahua Ward No. 12, P.S. Rosera, District - Samastipur .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt. Madhuri Lata(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 07-01-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Rosera P.S. Case No. 190 of 2014 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Chandni Kumari the daughter of the informant married with the petitioner was allegedly, burnt and during treatment she died and it is alleged that due to non-fulfillment of dowry by way of Rs. 40,000/- she was burnt.

Submission is of false implication and that the wife of the petitioner due to some dispute burnt herself and this fact has been supported by the witnesses vide paragraph no. 6 to 11 of the case diary and accordingly, after completing investigation

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45589 of 2015 (3) dt.07-01-2016 chargesheet has been submitted under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code and as such the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration to which the learned APP does not oppose. In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering that chargesheet has been submitted under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 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 learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rosera in S. T. No. 393 of 2015 arising out of Rosera P.S. Case No. 190 of 2014, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be a 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) avin/- U T