Phantush Poddar @ Sintu Poddar @ Fantush Poddar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57393 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-66 Year-2024 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE - NAUGACHIA District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== Phantush Poddar @ Sintu Poddar @ Fantush Poddar S/O Late Jaiprakash Poddar R/O Vill.- Bikrampur, P.S.- Bihpur, Dist.- Bhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar Patna 2.

Rita Devi W/O Phantush Poddar @ Sintu Poddar @ Fantush Poddar R/O Vill.- Bikrampur, P.S.- Bihpur, Dist.- Bhagalpur ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Hafiz Shahbaz Arif, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Humayou Ahmad Khan, APP For the Informant/s :

Mr. Aditya Nath Pandey, Adv.

Mr. Yeshoneel Ratnam, Adv.

Ms. Neha Kumari, Adv.

Ms. Aprajita Kumari, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 03-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Complaint Case No. No. 66 of 2024 dated 27.02.2024 registered for the offences punishable u/ss 147, 323, 504, 506 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the complainant alleged that after 10 years of marriage, the petitioner and the co-accused persons started assaulting and torturing the complainant mentally and physically. It is further alleged that the husband of the complainant has an illicit relationship with another lady.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57393 of 2025(3) dt.03-11-2025 2/2

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner is the husband of the complainant and he has no concern with the alleged offence. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner. The petitioner neither demanded any dowry nor tortured the complainant. The petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 22.04.2025.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation levelled against the petitioner as well as the period of custody, the petitioner above-named, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Naugachiya, Bhagalpur in connection with Complaint Case No. No. 66 of 2024.

7. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) shivam/- U T