Md. Imran v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.362 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-74 Year-2022 Thana- SINDHIYA District- Samastipur ====================================================== MD. IMRAN S/o Late Noor Mohammad R/o Village- Basauli, P.S.- Singhiya, Distt- Samastipur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vinay Kumar Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Gauri Shankar Gupta ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 21-08-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the informant alleged that her daughter was married to this petitioner eight years ago. On 17.4.2022, informant's daughter called him and told about the assault by her in-laws. Thereafter, on the same day at 4:30 PM, the informant came to know that his daughter was committed murder by the accused persons.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. The petitioner is husband of the deceased due to which he has falsely been implicated in this case. There is no prior complaint against

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.362 of 2023(5) dt.21-08-2023 2/2 the petitioner regarding torture or misbehave with the deceased. It is also submitted vide para 3 of the supplementary affidavit that during trial, witnesses along with the informant himself have not supported the prosecution case and stated that her daughter/deceased was died during treatment as she was ill. The petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of the bail petition. It is further submitted that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 30.9.2022.

5. Learned APP appearing for the state and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer of regular bail.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as custody of the petitioner, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with Singhiya P.S. Case No. 74 of 2021 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M.-1st Rosera, Samastipur.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Amandeep/- U T