Patna High CourtCR. MISC./61761/2025dismissed

Putun Chaudhari @ Patun Chaudhari v. The State Of Bihar

2025-09-08Mr. Justice Ashok Kumar Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.61761 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-450 Year-2021 Thana- GRIYAK District- Nalanda ====================================================== Putun Chaudhari @ Patun Chaudhari Son of Late Kishori Chaudhary R/o Village - Rupaspur, P.S. - Giriyak, Dist. - Nalanda. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar No. I, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kr. Singh, I/C APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 08-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in connection with Griyak (Pawapuri) P.S. Case No. 450 of 2021 instituted for the offence under Sections 302, 201, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The case of the prosecution is that one Sunaina Devi was married to the petitioner ten years ago. It is alleged that she was subjected to cruelty on account of non-fulfillment of dowry demand of a bike and Rs. 50,000/-. It is further alleged that on 20.09.2021, informant got information that Sunaina Devi has been killed by her in-laws.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and committed no offence. Learned

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61761 of 2025(2) dt.08-09-2025 2/2 counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial custody since 12.12.2021. He has further submitted that the witnesses which have been examined by the prosecution during trial, have turned hostile.

5. Learned APP appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for regular bail.

6. From perusal of the order of the learned trial court, it transpires, altogether four witnesses have been examined and only the evidence of informant and I.O. is remaining. Since the trial is at fag end, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner at this stage. Hence, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

7. However, the petitioner may be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after three months if the trial is not concluded.

8. Meanwhile, the trial court is directed to conclude the trial within three months.

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Shubham/- U T