Dinesh Tanti v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84963 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-147 Year-2019 Thana- GHANSHYAMPUR District- Darbhanga ====================================================== DINESH TANTI Son of Bhilo Tanti @ Bhilai Tanti Resident of Village - Adharpur, P.S.- Ghanshyampur, Distt - Darbhanga. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sameer Ranjan, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Umesh Lal Verma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 18-03-2020 Supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner. Let the same be kept on record. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Ghanshyampur P.S. Case No. 147 of 2019 registered for the offence punishable under sections 304B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per allegation in the FIR, the daughter of the informant, who was married to the petitioner in the year 2019, was poisoned to death by the accused persons including the petitioner and, as such, the FIR.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the allegations as levelled in the FIR, are false and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84963 of 2019(3) dt.18-03-2020 2/3 concocted. It is further submitted that in course of trial eight prosecution witnesses, who have been examined, have not supported the prosecution case and, as such, the petitioner who is in custody since 01.08.2019 and has no criminal antecedent, be enlarged on bail. It is further submitted that only two official witnesses, who are the investigating officer and the doctor, remain to be examined in the trial.

The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State who submits that as only two prosecution witnesses remain to be examined, the petitioner may not be enlarged on bail. He further submits that he expects that the two witnesses will be examined within a period of two months. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case including the fact that there is chance of conclusion of trial in the near future as only two witnesses on behalf of the prosecution remain to be examined, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his application for bail is rejected.

Learned Court below is directed to conclude the trial by examining the remaining witnesses within a period of two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84963 of 2019(3) dt.18-03-2020 3/3 order. In case, the trial is not concluded within a period of three months, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

Let a copy of this order be also communicated to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Darbhanga.

(Partha Sarthy, J) sushma/- U T