IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Cr.Misc. No.33760 of 2010
KUMAR RAZA KHAN
Versus
STATE OF BIHAR
-----------
2. 27.10.2010 Heard Sushri Neelu, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Shri Yogendra Kumar, learned A.P.P. for the
State.
Learned counsel for the petitioner attempted to
convince the Court that materials, even to raise grave suspicion
against the petitioner of committing offences for which the
learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtas at Sasaram
directed framing of charges against him and other accused by
his order dated 20.7.2010, were not available to him when he
was passing that order in Sessions Trial No. 187 of 2010. She
also took the Court to the provision of Sections 304(B) of the
Indian penal Code and referred to the findings recorded by the
learned trial Judge itself that it was a case of suicide and there
was some material in the case diary indicating as if the lady
might have an unhealthy mind which could have led her to end
her life.
The learned Additional Sessions Judge while
passing the order has referred to a number of paragraphs of the
case diary containing the statements of the witnesses which
indicated as if there were sufficient materials to indicate that
there was a demand of dowry and that the lady was being
harassed in that connection which might have led her to commit
2
suicide.
As regards the ill-mental health of the lady, as
argued by the learned counsel, this could be a defence which
could not be taken into consideration at the time of framing of
charges as the duty of the court is confined only to look to the
material which cold indicate sufficient ground for proceeding
against the accused for presuming that the accused has
committed some offence. Those materials were available to the
court in abundance and the order does not appear suffering from
any illegality.
The petition appears of no merit. It is dismissed.
Kanth ( Dharnidhar Jha, J.)