Patna High CourtCR. MISC./47682/2016rejected

Navin Singh @ Bhola v. The State Of Bihar

2017-04-18Mr. Justice Arvind Srivastava2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.47682 of 2016 (6) dt.18-04-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.47682 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -2 Year- 2016 Thana -BUDHUCHAK District- BHAGALPUR ======================================================

1. Navin Singh @ Bhola Son of Shiv Chandra Singh Resident of VillageKishandaspur, P.S. Budhuchak District Bhagalpur .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shiwesh Chandra Mishra For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Sanjay Kumar Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 18-04-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Petitioner is in custody since 20.01.2016 in connection with Kahalgaon (Budhuchak) P.S. Case No. 2 of 2016 registered under Sections 498(A), 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner happens to be husband of daughter of the informant is innocent and has not committed any offence. In fact, the deceased had died due to an accident met with her while she was cooking on the Kerosene stove, resultantly, she got burnt injury and succumbed to the injury. The petitioner, who is of clean antecedent, has never demanded any dowry nor he assaulted the deceased in any manner. The petitioner is rotting in custody for the last fifteen months. Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail of this

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.47682 of 2016 (6) dt.18-04-2017 petitioner and submitted that there is direct allegation of assault and demand of dowry against the petitioner, who is husband of the deceased.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of this petitioner is, hereby, rejected. However, the trial court is directed to conclude the trial preferably within a period of six months.

(Arvind Srivastava, J.) brajesh/- U T