IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.48115 of 2007 SEEMA SHARAN W/O MR. MANOJ RANJAN PRASAD R/O B-103, HOUSING COLONY, P.S. KANKARBAGH, DIST. PATNA, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT A-29, RAJESHWARI SOCIETY, IOC ROAD, AHMADABAD. ---- PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. ASHA SRIVASTAVA W/O SANJAY KUMAR SARAN R/O OF MOHALLA -103, HOUSING COLONY, P.S. KANKARBAGH, DIST. PATNA. ----- OPP. PARTIES. ----------- 04. 23.03.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, informant and State. Petitioner seeks quashing of order dated 18.07.2007, passed by the learned trial Court Additional Sessions Judge XI, Patna, in Sessions Trial No. 444 of 1996 (State vs. S.K.Sharan), whereby the application filed by the petitioner herein for discharge has been considered and rejected. A brief statement of facts essential for the disposal of the case may be noticed. An F.I.R. was lodged on the statement of victim/deceased Asha Srivastava (recorded at P.M.C.H.) on 04.10.1994. She made allegation that after marriage she was tortured in the matrimonial home by the husband and other in-laws, and ultimately an attempt was made to put her on fire by sprinkling kerosene oil. In a serious condition, she was admitted in the hospital and subsequently died. The matter was investigated and charge sheet was submitted. Husband and father-in-law were forwarded by the police for trial. In course of trial, several 2 witnesses appeared and deposed. Their evidence implicated the petitioner as well in the commission of the offence(s). Accordingly, she was summoned under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Petitioner appeared in the said trial and filed an application for discharge which has been considered and rejected by the impugned order. The learned trial Court has found and recorded that at least evidence of three prosecution witnesses examined in the case definitely implicate the petitioner. From the impugned order it further appears that the discharge was sought primarily on the ground of alibi. The learned trial Court considered the matter in right perspective and rejected the application. This Court finds no merit in the application, which is, accordingly, dismissed. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)