Patna High CourtCR. MISC./63103/2025bail rejected

Md. Shagir v. The State Of Bihar

2025-09-24Mr. Justice Chandra Prakash Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63103 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-152 Year-2024 Thana- KATHAIYA District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Md. Shagir S/o Md. Islam Resident of Village - Pyarepur, P.S - Kathaiya, District - Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sheo Kumar Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Umanath Mishra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 24-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Kathaiya P.S. Case No. 152 of 2024 dated 28.07.2024 registered for the offences punishable u/ss 80 and 3(5) of the B.N.S.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and the co-accused persons are alleged to have killed the informant's daughter due to non-fulfillment of demand of Rs. 5 Lakh as dowry.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner who is husband of the deceased. The petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63103 of 2025(2) dt.24-09-2025 2/2 neither demanded any dowry nor tortured the deceased. It is next submitted that the deceased was not subjected to torture or any cruelty soon before her death for or in connection with demand of dowry. It is further submitted that occurrence took place on 23.07.2024 but FIR has been lodged on 28.07.2024 without any explanation. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 23.06.2025.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the bail petition of the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner is the husband of the deceased.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the heinous nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on bail.

7. Learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest.

8. The application stands rejected.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Raj Ranjan/- U T