Bail was rejected to the petitioner in a dowry murder case. The trial was directed to be concluded within four months with directions to authorities for witness production.
Bail rejected; trial to conclude in four months; witnesses to be produced.
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.2627 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-361 Year-2017 Thana- MOUZAHIDPUR District- Bhagalpur
======================================================
Nikhil Kumar Sah @ Nikhil Kumar, aged about 25 years (M), Son of Ajay Sah, resident of Mohalla-Aliganj, P.S-Mojahidpur(Babarganj), Dist.Bhagalpur.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Sr. Advocate and Mr.Dr. Anand Kumar, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER
5 15-04-2019
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner is languishing in custody since
30.11.2017 in a case for the offence registered under Section 304(B)/34 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. Charge sheet has been submitted in the present case. There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2627 of 2019(5) dt.15-04-2019 2/3
present case. There is no substantive evidence to suggest the implication of the petitioner in the present case. There is no eye witness to the alleged occurrence. There is no demand of dowry.
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 postmortem report also supports the allegation made in the F.I.R.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The same is rejected in connection with Mojahidpur (Babarganj) P.S. Case No. 361 of 2017, pending in the court of learned Additional District Judge-Ist, Bhagalpur.
As per the report submitted by the learned court below, it has been stated that only Doctor and Investigating Officer are to be examined in the present case and the trial is expected to be concluded within a period of four months.
The court below is directed to take all necessary steps to conclude the trial preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order.
The District Magistrate, Bhagalpur and the Superintendent of Police, Bhagalpur, are also directed to ensure that the prosecution witnesses are produced in the court below
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2627 of 2019(5) dt.15-04-2019 3/3
on the date fixed by the court below so that the trial could be concluded within the stipulated period.
Let a copy of this order be communicated to the District Magistrate, Bhagalpur and the Senior Superintendent of Police, Bhagalpur.
(Sudhir Singh, J)
U.K./-
U T
3 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner who is in custody since November 2017 in a dowry death case.
How to ensure the trial is concluded within four months.
Whether the District Magistrate and Superintendent of Police must ensure production of prosecution witnesses.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Nikhil Kumar Sah @ Nikhil Kumar
The State Of Bihar
Sudhir Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
