Patna High CourtCR. MISC./34796/2025dismissed

Raj Kumar Sharma @ Raj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-05Mr. Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34796 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-156 Year-2023 Thana- MAHESHKHUNT District- Khagaria ====================================================== Raj Kumar Sharma @ Raj Kumar S/o- Ganauri Sharma Village PO- Pakrail Sharma Tola Ps- Maheshunt Dist- Khagaria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ram Sumiran Rai For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anish Chandra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 05-02-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is seeking regular bail in connection with Maheshkhunt P.S. Case No. 156 of 2023, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304(B)r/w 34 of the IPC.

3. According to FIR, the accused persons including the petitioner tortured the victim variously for non-fulfillment of dowry demand and ultimately killed her.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the marriage of the deceased was solemnized with the petitioner four years prior to the occurrence. She committed suicide herself. The husband gave telephonic information to the family members of the deceased. The petitioner has been in custody since 03.01.2025.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34796 of 2025(6) dt.05-02-2026 2/2

5. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail.

6. The report regarding the stage of the trial was called for from the learned court below, which shows that the trial is not proceeding due to non-appearance of co-accused Roushan Kumar and the case is at the stage of appearance.

7. Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, the petitioner does not deserve the privileges of bail, which is hereby rejected.

8. The learned court below is directed to expedite the trial. The petitioner has been in custody since 03.01.2025. The learned trial court is directed to split up the trial of the petitioner from the other co-accused persons, who are absconding and to proceed with the trial, take every endeavour to conclude the trial within a period of nine months.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Nirmal/- U T