Patna High CourtCR. MISC./18415/2024bail rejected

Md. Kaisher v. The State Of Bihar

2024-05-03Mr. Justice Dr. Anshuman2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18415 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-394 Year-2020 Thana- MAKHDUMPUR District- Jehanabad ====================================================== Md. Kaisher Son of Md. Jamal Resident of Village Harnitar, P.S.- Makhdumpur, District- Jehanabad (Bihar) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

Monina Khatoon Wife of Late Md. Husain Resident of Village- Japharganj, P.S.- Jehanabad, District- Jehanabad (Bihar) ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Amrendra Kumar Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nawal Kishore Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 03-05-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with S.Tr. No.95 of 2021, arising out of Makhdumpur P.S. Case No. 394 of 2020 lodged under Sections 304B, 201 and 34 of the I.P.C. and added charge form 302 IPC Judicial Magistrate.

3. As per the prosecution case, the F.I.R. has been lodged against nine named accused persons including the petitioner against whom there is allegation of dowry. Upon nonfulfillment, they killed the informant's daughter.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He submits

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18415 of 2024(3) dt.03-05-2024 2/2 that the petitioner is the husband of the victim. He further submits that the petitioner is not involved in the commission of crime and his name has been figured in this case only on suspicion.

5. Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 30.08.2022 having clean antecedent.

6. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that there is specific allegation against the petitioner and his family.

7. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Therefore, the bail application of the petitioner is hereby rejected, but liberty is hereby granted to the petitioner that he may renew his prayer for bail 9 months after framing of charge.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.) Prakashmani/- U T