Shashi Kant Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69800 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-157 Year-2021 Thana- SIKRAUL District- Buxar ====================================================== SHASHI KANT PANDEY S/o Birendra Pandey Resident of VillageBasmanpur, P.S.-Sikraul, District-Buxar. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Surendra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 05-03-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Sessions Trial no.79 of 2023 (arising out of Sikraul P.S. Case no.157 of 2021) registered under sections 304B, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states that his daughter, who was married to the petitioner herein, was tortured by the accused persons including the petitioner for nonfulfillment of demand of dowry by way of a gold chain and Rs.2 lacs in cash and ultimately she was done to death and her body got disappeared.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. The allegations levelled in the F.I.R. are false and concocted.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69800 of 2023(3) dt.05-03-2024 2/2 Admittedly, the informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence. The trial has commenced in the learned trial Court. Referring to the depositions of the informant and other witnesses brought on record as annexures to the supplementary affidavit, it is submitted that neither the informant nor the other family members of the deceased have supported the prosecution case and were declared hostile. The petitioner is in custody since 2.6.2022 and there being no chance of his conviction, the petitioner be enlarged on bail.

5. Heard learned A.P.P. for the State.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations against the petitioner in the F.I.R. together with trial having commenced in the learned trial Court, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.

7. Learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to conclude the same at the earliest preferably within a period of six months from the date of communication of this order.

(Partha Sarthy, J) Saurabh/- U T