Jhuna Paswan v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85836 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-22 Year-2024 Thana- SUGAULI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Jhuna Paswan son of Mangru Paswan @ Mangaru Hazara Resident of villagePanjiarwa @ Panjiyrwa P.S. -Sugauli Dist -East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Rajeev Ranjan, Advocate :
Mr. Sumit Kumar Srivastva, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 25-03-2026 Heard Mr. Rajeev Ranjan, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 16.01.2024 in connection with Sugauli P.S. Case No. 22 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 13.01.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 304(B) of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he killed the daughter of the informant due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case merely on the basis that he is husband of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85836 of 2025(3) dt.25-03-2026 2/3 deceased. Although the petitioner is named in the FIR but from bare perusal of the FIR it appears that there is no specific allegation of assault or overt act or demand of dowry against him.
5. Vide order dated 09.01.2026 a report was called with regard to stage of the trial. Report of the learned Trial Court dated 15.01.2026 reveals that charge has been framed against the petitioner on 22.04.2025 and out of nine chargesheet witnesses, four witnesses have been examined.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the report of the learned Trial Court the trial is not likely to be concluded in the near future and the petitioner is in custody since 16.01.2024 i.e. for more than two years.
7. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and report of the trial court as well as period of custody, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned 10th Additional Session Judge, East Champaran, Motihari in connection with Sugauli P.S. Case No. 22 of 2024, subject to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85836 of 2025(3) dt.25-03-2026 3/3 following conditions:- i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Suruchi/- U T