Anil Baitha v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.75703 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-114 Year-2025 Thana- CHANPATIA District- West Champaran ====================================================== Anil Baitha S/O Sri Nakchhed Baitha Resident of Village- Gidha, Ward No. 03, P.S- Chanpatia, Distt.- West Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sharad Kumar Verma, Advocate For the State :

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

Ms. Kumari Akanksha Rai, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 11-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Chanpatia P.S. Case no. 114 of 2025 registered under sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states that his sister was married to the petitioner herein. Two daughters were born out of the said wedlock. As a result of the physical and mental torture by the husband, who is the petitioner herein, also as a result of assault, it is stated that the informant learnt about his sister having been killed by the accused persons including the husband.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75703 of 2025(4) dt.11-02-2026 2/2 petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case only for the reason of his being the husband of the deceased. Independent witnesses in course of investigation have stated that the sister of the informant committed suicide. The petitioner is in custody since 4.7.2025, has no criminal antecedent and chargesheet has been submitted in the case.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant. Learned counsel for the informant submits that besides the petitioner being the husband of the deceased, the witnesses in course of investigation and specially in paragraph nos. 51, 52 and 68 of the case diary have supported the prosecution case as a result of which the deceased hung herself.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations in the FIR, the material that has transpired in course of investigation against the petitioner who happens to be the husband of the deceased, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.

(Partha Sarthy, J) sauravkrsinha/- U T