Dismissed¶23

Md. Nazam @ Md. Nijam v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC12 May 2025CR. MISC./4964/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court; Cr. Misc. No.4964 of 2025; Rudra Prakash Mishra, J.; bail rejected; dowry death; Section 302 IPC; Section 304B IPC; Section 34 IPC; Falka P.S. Case No. 94 of 2024; GR No. 2208 of 2024; Katihar; husband of deceased; specific allegation; co-accused Salim; custody since 28.04.2024; no criminal antecedent; expedite trial; liberty to renew bail within six months; consider on own merit without prejudice.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to renew the bail prayer before the Trial Court if the trial is not concluded within six months; any such application to be considered on its own merit without prejudice to this order. ¶23

Md. Nazam @ Md. Nijam Vs The State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to renew the bail prayer before the Trial Court if the trial is not concluded within six months; any such application to be considered on its own merit without prejudice to this order.

¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, husband of the deceased, facing charges under Sections 302, 304B and 34 IPC in Falka P.S. Case No. 94 of 2024 (GR No. 2208 of 2024) for alleged dowry-related torture and killing, should be granted bail.

¶16

Ratio / Principle

The Court is not inclined to grant bail because there is specific allegation against the petitioner and the petitioner is the husband of the deceased.

¶22

Key takeaways

The prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner is rejected.ratio¶23
The learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.ratio¶24
Liberty granted to the petitioner to renew the prayer for bail before the Trial Court if the trial is not concluded within six months.ratio¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J.), by order dated 12-05-2025 in Criminal Miscellaneous No.4964 of 2025, rejected the bail application of Md. Nazam @ Md. Nijam, husband of the deceased, sought in connection with Falka P.S. Case No. 94 of 2024, GR No. 2208 of 2024, instituted under Sections 302, 304B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, arising from the alleged torture and killing of the deceased for non-fulfillment of a demand of dowry. The State opposed bail, pointing to specific allegations that the petitioner along with co-accused Salim assaulted and tortured the victim over dowry demands. Holding that there was specific allegation against the petitioner and that he was the husband of the deceased, the Court declined bail and rejected the prayer. The Trial Court was directed to expedite the trial, and the petitioner was granted liberty to renew the bail prayer before the Trial Court if the trial was not concluded within six months, with any such application to be considered on its own merit without prejudice to this order.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4964 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-94 Year-2024 Thana- FALKA District- Katihar

¶3

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

¶4

Md. Nazam @ Md. Nijam Son of Md. Salim Resident of VillageWahidnagar, P.S.- Falka, Distt.- Katihar

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance :

¶10

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Anurag Singh, APP

¶11

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

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA

¶13

ORAL ORDER

¶14

4 12-05-2025

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

¶16

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Falka P.S. Case No. 94 of 2024, GR No. 2208 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Sections 302, 304B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

Prosecution case, in short, is that the petitioner alongwith the family members tortured and killed the deceased for the non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. Petitioner is the husband of the deceased. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that general and omnibus allegation has

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4964 of 2025(4) dt.12-05-2025 2/3

¶20

been made against the petitioner. No specific overt act is alleged against the petitioner. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 28.04.2024 and has no criminal antecedent.

¶21

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Learned APP further submitted that there is specific allegation against this petitioner along with co-accused Salim that they assaulted and tortured the victim for the non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. Learned APP, therefore, prays that petitioner may not be released on bail.

¶22

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, there being specific allegation against the petitioner as also petitioner is the husband of the deceased, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶23

Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner is, hereby, rejected.

¶24

Learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.

¶25

However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew the prayer for grant of bail before the Trial Court if the trial is not concluded within a period of six months from today. If any such application is filed before the learned Trial Court,

¶26

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4964 of 2025(4) dt.12-05-2025 3/3

¶27

the same shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order.

¶28

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)

¶29

Alok Verma/-

¶30

U T

Md. Nazam @ Md. Nijam v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Nazam @ Md. Nijam v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Umesh Chaudhary Vs The State of Bihar

Kundan Singh @ Kundan Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Rohit Kumar Singh @ Rohit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Kumar Vipin @ Vipin Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ashish Kumar Sharma @ Ashu Vs The State of Bihar

Bijay Singh Vs The State of Bihar