IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.33212 of 2009 BIDYA NAND SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 5 17.3.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the State. The informant has filed this application for cancellation of bail granted to Opposite party no.2 by order dated 4.2.2008 passed in Cr.Misc.No.55563 of 2007. It is alleged by the informant that the accused persons including the Opposite party no.2 tortured her daughter for demand of dowry and ultimately killed her. The police, however, submitted charge sheet under section 498A/34 of the Penal Code. On protest, section 304B of the Penal Code was subsequently added and the case was committed to the court of sessions. The Opposite party no.2 was taken into custody on 28.8.2004. This court rejected the bail application of Opposite party no.2 on 24.8.2007 with an observation that if the trial does not conclude within three months, he may renew his prayer for bail. Thereafter, the Opposite party no.2 again filed bail application vide Cr.Misc.No.55563 of 2007, wherein in paragraph 1 it has been stated that the petitioner has been made accused in a case under section 498A/34 of the Penal Code. Mentioning section 498A/34 of the Penal Code was obviously a mistake as the accused (Opposite party no.2) by that time was also charged under section 304B of the Penal Code as well. 2 KHAN The Opposite party no.2 only through the supplementary affidavit filed on 22.1.2008, had brought the aforesaid fact on record. This court is of the view that the entire facts should have been brought in the very first petition, instead of bringing it on record by way of supplementary affidavit. Having regard to the fact that the Opposite party no.2 has remained in custody for 3½ years and also that he has brought the relevant fact on record by way of supplementary affidavit, I am not inclined to cancel the bail granted to the Opposite party no.2. It appears that only the Investigating Officer and the Doctor remains to be examined in the case. The Opposite party no.2 would remain physically present in court on each and every date except for pressing circumstnaces till both the official witnesses are examined. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this application stands dismissed. (S.P.Singh,J)