Sanjeet Singh @ Sanjeet Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86296 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-193 Year-2019 Thana- RAGHUNATHPUR District- Siwan ====================================================== SANJEET SINGH @ SANJEET KUMAR SINGH S/O SHREE SHIVJEE SINGH R/O village - Narhan, P.S- Raghunathpur, District- Siwan ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Yashraj Bardhan, Advocate For the State :

Mr.Shyameshwar Dayal, A.P.P.

For the Informant :

Mr.Shuhesh Pandey, Advocate Mr. Amit Kumar Mishra, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 17-05-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Raghunathpur P.S. Case No. 193 of 2019 corresponding to Sessions Trial No. 225 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Section 304B/34 of the I.P.C.

3. As per prosecution case, petitioners and others are alleged to have concertedly committed the murder of informant's daughter under conspiracy for non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the bail of the present petitioner has already been rejected by this Court Vide Cr. Misc. 32875 of 2022 on 16.01.2023 with an observation that if trial is not concluded within nine months, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail. He further submits that petitioner is in custody

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86296 of 2023(3) dt.17-05-2024 2/3 since 23.02.2023 and bears no criminal antecedent. He further submits that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence as alleged against him in F.I.R. Learned counsel through Annexure 6 of supplementary affidavit submits that petitioner has no way participated in the alleged occurrence as he was not present at the place of occurrence on the date of alleged occurrence. Learned counsel further submitted that petitioner is ready to co-operate in framing of charge as well as in the proceedings of trial.

5. The learned A.P.P. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that earlier bail prayer of the petitioner has been rejected on merit vide order dated 16.01.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 32875 of 2022. They further submitted that petitioner being a husband alongwith other committed the said occurrence for non-fulfillment of demand of dowry and postmortem report is quite evident with regard to the alleged occurrence.

6. In pursuance of order dated 05.01.2024 the trial court vide letter no. 56 dated 22.01.2024 has sent its report which indicates that petitioner is not co-operating in the proceeding of trial.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly keeping in view that earlier bail prayer of the petitioner has been rejected on merit as well as report of the trial court, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86296 of 2023(3) dt.17-05-2024 3/3 of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

8. However, trial court is directed to conclude the trial within nine months by putting the same on day to day basis from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order. If the attitude of the petitioner is not co-operative, then, his submission would not be taken into account.

(Alok Kumar Pandey, J) alok/- U T