Sunil Mahto @ Sunil Kumar Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.73319 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-309 Year-2017 Thana- SARAIYA District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== SUNIL MAHTO @ SUNIL KUMAR MAHTO Son of Sri Nand Lal Mahto, Resident of Village-Sukul Basara, Police Station-Saraiya, DistrictMuzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pawan Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sri Dilip Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 09-01-2019 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in Saraiya (Jaitpur O.P.) P.S. Case No. 309/2017 (S.Tr. No. 492 of 2018), instituted for offences under Section(s) 304(B), 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Petitioner is husband of deceased.

It is alleged in the written report that marriage of daughter of informant was solemnized with this petitioner two years ago. After six months of marriage, informant went to the matrimonial house of his daughter and found some marks of assault on her body. She told the informant that her husband along with other family members used to assault her for demand

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.73319 of 2018(3) dt.09-01-2019 2/2 of Rs. 1 lacs. It is further alleged that on 12.08.2017, the informant got information on telephone that his daughter has been done to death.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that trial has started and evidence of informant has already been recorded.

Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. Accordingly, prayer for bail of petitioner is rejected.

The trial court is directed to expedite the trial and make efforts to conclude the same as early as possible preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order.

Petitioner is given liberty to renew prayer for bail after six months in the event trial is not concluded within aforesaid period.

(Sanjay Priya, J) rakhi/- U T