Deepak Sharma @ Deepak Kumar Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66293 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-303 Year-2020 Thana- BIKRAM District- Patna ====================================================== Deepak Sharma @ Deepak Kumar Sharma, Son of Ram Nath Sharma @ Rangnath Sharma, Resident of Village- Pariawan, P.S.- Bikram, DistrictPatna (Bihar) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ravi Bhushan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Md. Mushtaque Alam, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 12-09-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Let the defect (s), as pointed out by the office, be removed within a period of four weeks from the date of resumption of physical filing and physical removal of defect. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with Bikram P.S. Case No. 303 of 2020, registered for the alleged offences under Sections 304 (B), 302 and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the prosecution case, the daughter of the informant was married to the petitioner and they lead a happy married life for five years and thereafter, the petitioner and other co-accused persons started torturing her on account of demand

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66293 of 2021(4) dt.12-09-2022 2/3 of dowry. Later on, the daughter of the informant was killed and her dead body was disposed of by the petitioner and other coaccused persons. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the daughter of the informant was died due to snakebite and her funeral was performed in presence of both the families. There was no dispute between the petitioner and the deceased wife and this fact finds mention in the FIR wherein it has been stated that there was no dispute between the husband and the wife for five years after the marriage. The learned counsel further submits that there has been no complaint prior to lodging of this FIR. The petitioner is in custody since 31.10.2020 and the charge sheet has been submitted.

Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail submitting that the witnesses in paragraphs 6 and 7 of the case diary have supported the prosecution case. However, he concedes that witness in paragraph 48 of the case diary has stated that the deceased fell ill and she had been taken to the hospital and she died.

Perused the records.

Having regard to the specific nature of allegation against the petitioner, which has been supported by the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66293 of 2021(4) dt.12-09-2022 3/3 witnesses during investigation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage.

Accordingly, his prayer for bail is rejected. However, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same within nine months. (Arun Kumar Jha, J) V.K.Pandey/- U T