Patna High CourtCR. MISC./37040/2014rejected

Jito Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

2015-01-23Mr. Justice Hemant Kumar Srivastava2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.37040 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -55 Year- 2013 Thana -BAKHRI District- BEGUSARAI ======================================================

1. Jito Sahni S/o Vishundeo Sahani Resident of Village Bahuara, Police Station Bakhari (Parihara), District Begusarai. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satish Chandra For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 23-01-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Petitioner is husband of the deceased and he is languishing in jail custody since 25.11.2013 in a case registered under section 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Admittedly, deceased died due to burn injuries within one year of her marriage and the informant very categorically leveled allegation against the petitioner regarding demand of dowry as well as torture to the deceased. In course of investigation, independent witnesses stated that when they came near the house of the petitioner, they found that the deceased was burning in fire and the witnesses along with this petitioner any how extinguished the fire, in the meantime police came there and

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37040 of 2014 (3) dt.23-01-2015 2/2 took the deceased to hospital.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as submissions of the parties, I am not inclined to grant privilege of bail to the petitioner, accordingly, his prayer of bail in connection with session trial not 419 of 2014, arising out of Bakhari P.S.Case No. 55 of 2013, pending in the court of 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Begusarai stands rejected. However, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude the same as early as possible preferably within nine months from the date of receipt/ production of copy of this order, failing which the petitioner shall be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail before the concerned court itself, taking the plea of his long detention as well as stage of the trial. (Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J) Namita/- U