Patna High CourtCR. MISC./62137/2025rejected

Bachhru Lathour @ Bachharu Lathour v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-20Justice Smt. Soni Shrivastava3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62137 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-277 Year-2024 Thana- ITARHI District- Buxar ====================================================== Bachhru Lathour @ Bachharu Lathour S/o Rangila Lathour R/o VillageMathiya Dera, P.S.- Koransarai, Dist.- Buxar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dr.Kamal Deo Sharma For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 20-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 123, 3(5) of the B.N.S.

3. Petitioner is said to have committed the murder of the sister of the informant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has been falsely implicated in this case on account of the fact that he is the husband of the deceased. The marriage of the petitioner had taken place with the deceased more than 9 years back and no motive has been alleged as to why the deceased was done to death. Moreover, the postmortem report does not

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62137 of 2025(5) dt.20-02-2026 2/3 indicate any cause of death and her Viscera was preserved for examination. The Viscera report has also now been received which shows that no metallic or volatile poison could be detected in the same. The petitioner is in custody since 31.12.2024 and undertakes to cooperate in the trial.

5. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the application for bail on the ground of the allegations mentioned in the FIR.

6. Report with regard to the stage of the case dated 18.11.2025 indicated that three out of nine witnesses were examined. However, counsel for the petitioner has fairly submitted that as of now six out of nine witnesses have already been examined and some of them have not supported the case of the prosecution.

7. Taking into consideration the fact that the case has reached an advanced stage of trial, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is rejected in connection Itarhi P.S. Case No. 277 of 2024.

8. However, learned court below is directed to expedite the trial even by way of holding day to day proceedings in order to conclude the trial preferably within a

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62137 of 2025(5) dt.20-02-2026 3/3 period of four months, failing which the petitioner shall be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

(Soni Shrivastava, J) devendra/- U T