Rupesh Roy v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.70586 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-317 Year-2017 Thana- NARPATGANJ District- Araria ====================================================== Rupesh Roy Son of Sudama Roy Resident of Village- Nathpur, Roy Tola P.S. Narptanj Ditrict Araria.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Mukesh Kumar Rana For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 10-12-2018 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Petitioner seeks bail in Narpatganj P.S. Case No.317 / 2017 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Informant is the uncle of the deceased who in his written complaint has stated that his niece Sanju Devi was married to the brother of the petitioner two years earlier and on account of non-fulfillment of demand of dowry, she was being tortured and ultimately killed by family members. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner resides separately and he has no concern with the affairs of the family of the deceased or her husband. It has further been submitted that niece of the informant died due to medical complications. Charge-sheet has already been submitted

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.70586 of 2018(2) dt.10-12-2018 2/2 on 20.08.2018.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner named above be released on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Araria in connection with Narpatganj P.S. Case No.317 /2017, with following 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 properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the court below.

(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) Sanjay/- U