Patna High CourtCR. MISC./1937/2025dismissed

Dhama Mishra @ Premchand Mishra v. The State Of Bihar

2025-04-09Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1937 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-198 Year-2023 Thana- SURYAPURA District- Rohtas ====================================================== Dhama Mishra @ Premchand Mishra S/o Sri Jagdish Mishra R/o vill - Madhukarpur, PS- Dinara, District- Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Piyush Tiwari For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Satya Nand Shukla ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 09-04-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 459 of 2024 arising out of Suryapura P.S. Case No. 198 of 2023 registered for the offence under Sections 302, 120B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is said to have fired at the deceased which killed her.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no motive assigned for the killing of the deceased. He further submits that the charges have been framed in this case and the petitioner is in custody since 6.5.2024.

5. Learned counsel for the informant has opposed

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1937 of 2025(3) dt.09-04-2025 2/2 the application of the petitioner by submitting that it has come during investigation that the deceased and the petitioner were in a relationship and on the night of occurrence, the petitioner and his office friend went to the house of the deceased and tried to have sexual relation with her forcibly and upon opposing the same, she was shot dead. He also undertakes to produce the witnesses in the trial on the dates fixed in the trial.

6. Considering the facts of the case and the serious allegations levelled against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

8. If the trial of the petitioner is delayed due to the fault of the prosecution side then the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) Vikas/- U