Raj Kishore Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.24324 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -59 Year- 2016 Thana -GORICHAK District- PATNA ====================================================== Raj Kishore Rai S/o Chandradeo Rai, R/o Vill.- Mahajani, P.S.- Gaurichak, District- Patna.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anju Kumari @ Anju Narain, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Ashlam Ansari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 26-09-2018 Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in Gaurichak P.S. Case No. 59/2016 corresponding to Sessions Trial No. 592/17, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304(B), 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Informant is father of the deceased who in his written complaint has stated that marriage of his daughter was solemnized with petitioner four year ago and from the said wedlock one female child was also born. On 07.06.2016 at 7.00 a.m., he received information from the father of petitioner that his daughter has died and family members were made accused. It has been submitted that after investigation the police

has submitted charge-sheet and charges against petitioner have been framed on 23.09.2017, but thereafter, in spite of all efforts being taken by the trial court, no witness on behalf of prosecution has been examined, even the informant pursuant to summon issued has not appeared before the trial court. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent. He is in custody since 05.06.2017.

Considering the facts aforesaid, the petitioner abovenamed, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional District & Sessions Judge, Patna City in connection with Gaurichak P.S. Case No. 59/2016 corresponding to Sessions Trial No. 592/17, subject to the conditions:

(1.) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned.

(2.) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will be sufficient to

cancel his bail bonds.

(3.) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

(S. Kumar, J) Vinita/- U T