Md. Raju v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65331 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-43 Year-2025 Thana- AAJAM NAGAR District- Katihar ====================================================== Md. Raju S/O Giasuddin @ Gyasuddin R/O Village- Dhamaikol, P.S. - Azamnagar, Dist.- Katihar.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Md Qumrul Hoda, Adv.

For the State :

Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, APP For the Informant :

Mr. N. Ahmed, Adv.

Mr. Thakur Brijesh Singh, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 23-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

2. A prayer for bail has been made on behalf of the petitioner in connection with Azamnagar P.S. Case no.43 of 2025 registered under sections 103, 61 and 3(5) of BNS.

3. Allegation in the F.I.R is that accused persons killed the informant's daughter due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been made an accused after 12 years of marriage only on account of the fact that he happens to be the husband of the deceased. The petitioner also denied to have indulged in any demand of dowry and torture upon the deceased. Further, he submits that the deceased committed suicide as it is apparent from the medical report that the cause of death is asphyxia due to hanging. Further, the petitioner is in custody since 22.02.2025

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65331 of 2025() dt.23-02-2026 2/2 with no criminal antecedent.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State as also learned counsel for the informant on the ground that the petitioner, who is the husband of the deceased is primarily responsible for the welfare of his wife.

6. A report had been called for with respect to stage of the trial, which indicates that charges have been framed on 28.11.2025 and only 8 charge-sheet witnesses are there and trial is proposed to be concluded within a period of 8 months upon cooperation extended by both the parties. It has been informed that one witness has already been examined and the next date for examination is 26.02.2026.

7. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the report of the learned trial court with regard to conclusion of the trial within a period of 8 months, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and the application is rejected.

8. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after 8 months, if the trial is not concluded.

(Soni Shrivastava, J) Harsh/- U T