IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.10387 of 2011 Ranjan Paswan Versus The State Of Bihar ----------------------------------
4 24-08-2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the state.
Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that the
case of the petitioner has already been committed to the court
of sessions and so, he seeks permission to make necessary
correction in the prayer portion of the bail petition.
Permission is accorded.
Let the prayer portion of the petition be corrected
during course of the day.
Petitioner is husband of the deceased whose marriage
had taken place four years ago but allegedly, she was
subjected to cruelty and harassment by the petitioner and his
other family members on account of non-fulfillment of demand
of dowry and subsequently, they killed the deceased and threw
the dead body near the river.
The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is
that as a matter of fact, the deceased committed suicide out of
anger and frustration. It is pointed out by him that in the first
information report, it has specifically been mentioned by the
informant that on 27.04.2008, the deceased and petitioner had
attended a marriage ceremony of son of the informant and after
the marriage, the deceased was taken to her Sasural by the
petitioner but the deceased was not ready to leave her Mayaka
and the above-said act of the petitioner annoyed the deceased
and out of anger, she committed suicide. It is further contended
by him that after suicide, the petitioner due to fear psychosis,
threw the dead body of the deceased near a river.
Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of
the case as well as submission of the parties, particularly,
keeping in mind that sign of strangulation has been found on
the neck of the deceased, I do not feel it proper to release the
petitioner on bail.
Accordingly, prayer for bail of the petitioner in
connection with Sessions Trial No. 45 of 2011 arising out of
Kinjar P.S. Case No. 32 of 2008 is hereby rejected.
However, learned trial court is directed to expedite the
trial of the petitioner and conclude the same preferably within
one year from the date of receipt of this order and if the trial of
the petitioner is not concluded within the above-said period, the
petitioner may renew his prayer for bail.
Let the order be communicated to the court of
Additional Sessions Judge-I, Jehanabad for needful.
AKV/- (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J.)