IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Cr.Misc. No.4293 of 2011
HARILAL SAH .
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR .
-----------
2 9.2.2011 The petitioner, who is the father-in-law of the victim
girl, is in custody in relation to Mufassil P.S.Case no. 278 of
2010 instituted , inter alia, under Section 304 B IPC read with
Dowry Prohibition Act.
The complaint was lodged on 14.6.2010 before the
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai, inter alia, alleging
that the complainant heard that his daughter had been burnt in
the night intervening of 9th and 10th June,2010 . He immediately
went to the village and found the house locked and allegedly the
girl had been cremated. He says that he went to the police
station to lodge the information but it was not received. Hence
the complaint.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from
the complaint, later registered as a case, itself it is clear the
complainant/ informant god information about the incident on
10th June, 2010 itself and from 10th to 14th June, 2010, he took
no steps in the matter rather he, in fact, participated, in the
funeral. It is thereafter that the complaint is lodged. He points
out that the learned Sessions Judge while rejecting the bail
application committed serious error of records in noting that the
informant received the information on 16.6.2010 to show that
the information was with him.
2
Be that as it may, petitioner being the father-in-law,
there being no overt act against him and the husband-Sanjay
Sah being in custody, let above named petitioner be released on
bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned C.J.M., Begusarai in Mufassil P.S.Case no. 278 of 2010.
Singh ( Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)