Md. Intiyar @ Md. Imtiyaz @ Mister v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6192 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-174 Year-2024 Thana- PHULWARIA District- Begusarai ====================================================== Md. Intiyar @ Md. Imtiyaz @ Mister S/o Md. Razzaque Resident of villagePapraur, ward no 02, PS- Barauni, Distt.- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Chandani Khatoon D/o Md. Kayum R/o Fulwaria 01 Ganj, ward no. 20, P.S. - Fulwaria, Distt.- Begusarai ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vinod Gautam, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mohammad Sufyan, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 03-07-2025 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Fulwaria P.S. Case No. 174 of 2024, registered for the offence punishable under Section 69 of B.N.S.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has alleged that the petitioner had enticed her in a love track and had forcibly made physical relationship and when she had asked him to marry, he denied and thereafter he forcibly entered into the house of the informant, however, the police was called and he was apprehended.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated and there is admittedly a love affair between the petitioner and the victim girl. It has also been submitted that from the statement made under Section 183 B.N.S.S.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6192 of 2025(4) dt.03-07-2025 2/2 of the victim, it would be clear that she had shown her intent to marry the petitioner. It has next been submitted that petitioner has clean antecedent and is in custody since 14.10.2024.

5. The learned counsel for the Informant as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has stated that the trial has begun and two witnesses have been examined. It has also been submitted that from the report of the learned trial court, it would be evident that the trial would be completed within three months.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and taking into account that the trial is at its fag end, I am not inclined grant the petitioner privilege of regular bail.

7. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is rejected.

8. The learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial on day to day basis and conclude the trial within a period of four months.

(Sourendra Pandey, J) Siwani/- U T