IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.28654 of 2009 AJEET KUMAR RAI son of Chandeshwar Rai, Resident of Village Chaksalem, P.S.-Patory, District- Samastipur. . . . . . . . Petitioner. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3/ 16.10.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner, who is husband, is an accused in a case under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The fardbeyan was made on 19.04.2009 alleging therein that the accused persons tortured the informant’s daughter for demand of dowry. It is further alleged that accused persons burnt her daughter till death. Counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no explanation as to why the First Information Report was sent to the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Samastipur on 21.04.2009 when the same was registered on 19.04.2009. He further submits that the deceased sustained burn injury while cooking meal. He further submits that innocence of the accused persons would also transpire from the fact that after the death of the informant’s daughter they did not try to dispose of the dead body rather informed her Naihar people. He further submits that the three children of the petitioner will suffer, if he remained in jail custody. Learned counsel for the State submits that there is allegation of demand of dowry and torture and on account of non-fulfillment of dowry demand the deceased was done to - 2 - death. Having regard to the nature of the allegations, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is rejected. However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial. Uday/ (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)