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.)