A person accused of a crime is entitled to bail unless there is strong evidence against them.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31248 of 2022

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-52 Year-2022 Thana- JAGDISHPUR District- Bhagalpur

======================================================

Md Imtiyaz S/o Md. Nasim Resident of Village- Puraini, P.S.- Jagdishpur,

District- Bhagalpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s

======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s

:

Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate.

:

Md. Najmul Hodda, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal, APP.

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR

ORAL ORDER

3

11-01-2023

Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to

remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, within a

period of four weeks from today.

Heard Mr. N.K. Agrawal, learned senior counsel for

the petitioner duly assisted by learned counsel Md. Najmul

Hodda and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks regular bail, who is in custody in

connection with Jagdishpur P.S. Case No. 52 of 2022, registered

for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian

Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

The prosecution case is based on the fardbayan of the

informant alleging therein that on 11.02.2022 at about 08:30

PM, she received an information that her husband has been

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31248 of 2022(3) dt.11-01-2023

2/4

shot dead, upon which she went to the place of occurrence and

found that her husband sustained fire arm injury in his left

temple. The injured was brought to the hospital, where he

declared dead. It is alleged that the petitioner had illicit relation

with the informant’s Gotni, which was protested by the

informant’s husband and there was a dispute relating to drainage

and on account of that the petitioner along with 3-4 miscreants

committed murder of the informant’s husband.

Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the

petitioner submits that admittedly the informant was not an

eyewitness to the alleged occurrence and save and except the

suspicion that too on account of the so-called illicit relation

between the petitioner and the informant’s Gotni, his name has

been implicated in this case. He further submits that during the

course of investigation one of the witness whose statement has

been recorded in paragraph no.38 of the case diary, has

disclosed that after the alleged occurrence he had seen a person,

like the petitioner and 3-4 unknown miscreants fleeing from the

place of occurrence and save and except the material as stated

above there is nothing in the case diary which suggest the

complicity of the petitioner in the present crime. He next

submits that there is only one injury found over the body of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31248 of 2022(3) dt.11-01-2023

3/4

deceased and even as per the prosecution case it appears that 4

to 5 persons were found involved in committing the murder of

the husband of the informant.

On the other hand learned APP for the State

vehemently opposes the bail application and submits that the

petitioner was identified by one of the witness while he was

fleeing from the place of occurrence, apart from the fact that the

husband of the informant had been opposing the illicit

relationship of the petitioner and informant’s Gotani and the

motive is apparent.

Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf

of the parties and considering the materials available in the case

diary, there is no eyewitness to the alleged occurrence and save

and except the statement of the witness that petitioner was found

fleeing from the place of occurrence there is no material

suggesting the complicity of the petitioner and the petitioner

having fair antecedent, is in custody since 21.02.2022 and

moreover the investigation of the crime is already complete and

the char