Md. Dilshad Alam @ Md. Dilshad v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35992 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-549 Year-2019 Thana- SAHEBGANJ District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== MD. DILSHAD ALAM @ MD. DISHAD SON OF SITAB MIYAN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- BISHANPUR PATTI, P.S.-SAHEBGANJ, DISTRICT- MUZAFFARPUR.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Raju Kumar, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Ram Sevak Choudhary, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 08-02-2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties through video conferencing.
The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in a case registered under sections 304B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
As per the prosecution case, the daughter of the informant who was married to the petitioner was tortured for non-fulfillment of the demand of motorcycle etc. and was ultimately done to death by the accused persons including the petitioner herein.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case only for the reason that he happens to be the husband of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35992 of 2021(4) dt.08-02-2022 2/2 deceased. The allegations in the FIR are false and concocted. In fact the deceased committed suicide by hanging. The petitioner is in custody since 12.8.2020 and has no criminal antecedent. Chargesheet has been submitted in the case.
The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant. Learned counsel for the informant submits that the daughter of the informant was brutally murdered which is confirmed from the postmortem report wherein the death is said to be as a result of ante mortem strangulation.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the facts of the case, the petitioner being the husband of the deceased and the contents of the postmortem report, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected. Learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial. (Partha Sarthy, J) Spd/- U T