Patna High CourtCR. MISC./27834/2025bail granted

Md. Daud @ Md. Daud Alam v. The State Of Bihar

2025-08-05Mr. Justice R. P. Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27834 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-872 Year-2021 Thana- KATIHAR COMPLAINT CASE District- Katihar ====================================================== Md. Daud @ Md. Daud Alam S/o Late Md. Siddik Mansuri R/o Bhagwat, Ward no 2, PS-Isipur Barahat, Distt- Bhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

Sabnum Khatoon @ Maneka Khatoon W/o Md. Daud, D/o Md. Afjal R/o Baida, P.S.- Amdabad, Distt.- Katihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, APP For the Complainant :

Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 05-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the complainant.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Complaint Case No. 872 of 2021, instituted for the offences punishable under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the complainant was tortured and harassed by the petitioner and other co-accused persons due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27834 of 2025(3) dt.05-08-2025 2/2 the allegation levelled against the petitioner is general and omnibus in nature. The allegation alleged against the petitioner is completely false and concocted based on without any legal evidence. The petitioner has been implicated in this case due to non-execution of the landed property in her name. The petitioner is in custody since 23.01.2025 and has got no criminal antecedent.

5. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account 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/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Complaint Case No. 872 of 2021.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Rajorshi/- U T