Md. Ramjani @ Ramjani Nadaf @ Md. Ramjani Nadaf v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16883 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-6 Year-2024 Thana- GHANSHYAMPUR District- Darbhanga ====================================================== Md. Ramjani @ Ramjani Nadaf @ Md. Ramjani Nadaf Son of Md. Jamir Nadaf @ Jamir Nadaf Resident of Village- Galma, Police StationGhanshyampur, District- Darbhanga ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Raushan Khatoon, W/o Md. Shamim Nadaf, R/V- Baur, Post-Rasiyari, PSGhanshyampur, Dharbhanga ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Nilendu Kumar Choudhary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal, APP For the Informant :

Ms. Madhumala Kumari, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 24-06-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State. Perused the case diary.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Ghanshyampur P.S. Case No. 6 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Sections 304B, 498A, 201 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Prosecution case, in short, is that the petitioner alongwith the family members tortured and killed the deceased for the non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16883 of 2025(4) dt.24-06-2025 2/3 petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. Petitioner is the husband of the deceased. Learned counsel further submitted that initially, Compliant was filed by the complainant and later on FIR was registered under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. Learned counsel further submitted that there is a delay of about three months in lodging the complaint without any plausible explanation, which in itself, raises doubt over the prosecution story. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that general and omnibus allegation has been made against the petitioner. No specific overt act is alleged against the petitioner. Learned counsel further submitted that as per paragraph nos.

30 and 31 of the case diary, an independent witnesses has stated that deceased herself committed suicide by swallowing poison. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 14.11.2024 and has no criminal antecedent. The co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 23.09.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 49483 of 2024.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16883 of 2025(4) dt.24-06-2025 3/3 of the case as also the period of custody undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Ghanshyampur P.S. Case No. 6 of 2024, subject to the following conditions: (I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of the family of the petitioner.

(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.

(III) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses or threatens the informant/complainant or her family members, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Alok Verma/- U T