Chhotu Turiya v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69289 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-91 Year-2022 Thana- KAUWAKOL District- Nawada ====================================================== 1.

CHHOTU TURIYA Son of Baleshwar Turiya Resident of Village-Marpo (Tola Turiyadih), Police Station-Kawakol, District-Nawada. 2.

RINKU DEVI Wife of Chhotu Turiya Resident of Village-Marpo (Tola Turiyadih), Police Station-Kawakol, District-Nawada. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 20-12-2023

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. By order dated 2.11.2023 passed in the instant case the petitioner no. 2 was directed to be enlarged on bail.

3. The petitioner no. 1 has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Sessions Trial no. 170 of 2022 arising out of Kauwakol P.S. Case no. 91 of 2022 registered under sections 304B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. As per prosecution case, the daughter of the informant was married to the petitioner no. 1. There was demand of dowry to the tune of Rs. 1 lakh which on not being fulfilled, the informant states that his daughter was tortured and done to death.

5. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69289 of 2023(3) dt.20-12-2023 2/2 petitioner that the petitioner no. 1 has been falsely implicated in the case. He was happily married with the petitioner no. 2 and there was no occasion for him to marry the daughter of the informant. The allegations are false and concocted. Charge has been framed in the learned Court below and one witness has been examined on behalf of the prosecution. The petitioner is in custody since 26.2.2022 and undertakes to cooperate in the trial.

6. The application for bail of petitioner no. 1 is opposed by learned APP for the State.

7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations in the F.I.R, the material that has transpired in course of investigation against petitioner no. 1 who happens to the husband of the deceased and trial having commenced in the learned trial Court, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner no. 1 on bail and the application is rejected.

8. Learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest preferably within a period of 8 months from the date of communication of this order. (Partha Sarthy, J) Harsh/- U T