Patna High CourtCR. MISC./81416/2025rejected

Tahmid @ Tamid v. The State Of Bihar

2026-01-31Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81416 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-169 Year-2025 Thana- AMAUR District- Purnia ====================================================== Tahmid @ Tamid Son of Md. Mojib @ Birbal Resident of village - Ward No.- 7, Bhawanipur, P.S.- Amour, District - Purnia. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Kushal, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Satya Nand Shukla, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 31-01-2026 Heard Mr. Kushal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Satya Nand Shukla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 28.04.2025 in connection with Amour P.S. Case No. 169 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 28.04.2025 for the offences punishable under Section 103(1) of the BNS, 2023.

3. According to prosecution case, this petitioner killed his wife who happens to be the informant's daughter by means of iron rod.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. The allegation as alleged in the F.I.R is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81416 of 2025(3) dt.31-01-2026 2/2 any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. He further submits that the informant is not the eye witness of the alleged occurrence and merely on the basis of suspicion, petitioner has been made accused in the present case.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner has himself confessed his guilt in the present occurrence and the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R is supported by the medical evidence.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner supported by the medical evidence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Amour P.S. Case No. 169 of 2025 pending in the court of learned CJM, Purnea.

7. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T