IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CR. REV. No.371 of 2008
TAPAS KUMAR ROY
...PETITIONER
Versus
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR
2. RESHMI KUMARI, WIFE OF TAPAS KUMAR ROY
...OPPOSITE PARTIES
For the petitioner :Mr.Randhir Kumar no.1
For the State :Mr. Permeshwar Mehta,APP
-----------
04. 30.09.2010 Heard both sides.
Petitioner is an accused facing prosecution under
sections 307 and 498A IPC including section ¾ of the Dowry
Prohibition Act. He is aggrieved by order dated 02.02.2008,
passed by learned trial Judge in S.T.No.527/2007, whereby his
application filed under sections 227 and 228 Cr.P.C. has been
considered and rejected.
The impugned order was passed on 02.02.2008.
Present application was lodged in this Court on 16.04.2008. No
interim protection was granted to the petitioner. By order dated
08.09.2010, this court directed the petitioner to file a
supplementary affidavit disclosing the status/result of the
proceeding.
Counsel for the petitioner fairly states that during the
pendency of this application charges have been framed and trial
has commenced in which one witness has been examined. The
grievance of the petitioner in the present application is that based
on materials available on record no case under section 307 IPC
is made out. It is submitted that after the alleged attempt to
2
commit the offence in a motel the complainant/informant as well
as the present petitioner travelled together. Subsequent thereto,
as per the allegation, she was again subjected to torture and
ousted from matrimonial home. It is contended that there is no
injury report also.
Be that as it may, since the trial has already
commenced this court declines to interfere with the order.
Petitioner shall have liberty to raise/agitate all these
facts/grievances before learned trial Judge which shall be
considered at the time of final disposal of the matter.
The application is accordingly disposed of.
( Kishore K. Mandal )
hr