Hon'ble Justice Sudhir Singh rejected bail to the petitioner, a husband first charged for Section 304(B) IPC offence. Bench directed trial conclusion within nine months.
Bail rejected; trial to conclude within nine months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1164 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-16 Year-2017 Thana- PRANPUR District- Katihar
======================================================
Manju Baski, Son of Shukal Baski, resident of Gopalpur, Santhali, Tola, P.S. Pranpur, District-Katihar.
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr.Ajit Kumar Singh, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : Mr. Ajit Kumar, A.P.P. ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER
7 18-06-2019
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner is languishing in custody since 24.05.2017 in a case for the offence registered under Section 304(B) of the IPC.
The prosecution story, in brief, is that the accused persons including the petitioner killed the victim due to nonfulfilment of demand of dowry.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. There is no substantive evidence to suggest the implication of the petitioner in the present case. There is no
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1164 of 2019(7) dt.18-06-2019 2/2
eye witness to the alleged occurrence.
On behalf of the learned counsel for the State, it has been submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. The petitioner is the husband of the deceased. The onus is on him to explain the cause of the death of the deceased.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The same is rejected in connection with S. T. No. 266/2017, arising out of Pranpur P.S. Case No. 16/2017, pending in the court of learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Katihar.
The court below is directed to take all necessary steps to conclude the trial preferably within a period of nine months from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order.
(Sudhir Singh, J)
U.K./-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner accused in a dowry-related case under Section 304(B) IPC.
Whether learned Sessions Judge, Katihar should direct expulsion of the petitioner within nine months.
MANJU BASKI
THE STATE OF BIHAR
SUDHIR SINGH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
