Md. Masleuddin @ Bablu Vs The State of Bihar

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51614 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-308 Year-2023 Thana- BISFI District- Madhubani

¶3

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

¶4

Md. Masleuddin @ Bablu S/o Late Mustafa Jamali R/o Vill- Chhachhua, P.S.Bisfi, Distt- Madhubani

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar

¶7

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶8

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravi Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madan Kumar, APP For the Informant : Mr. Subhash Kumar Jha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶9

3 22-08-2025

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP

¶11

for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

¶12

The instance application for regular bail has been

¶13

filed by the petitioner in connection with Bisfi P.S. Case No. 308 of 2023 instituted for the offence u/s 304(B), 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

Earlier the application for regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court vide order dated 26.03.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 46140 of 2024 with a liberty to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after the examination of the informant.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a supplementary affidavit enclosing therein the depositions of the

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51614 of 2025(3) dt.22-08-2025 2/3

¶17

informant and doctor as well.

¶18

The case of the prosecution is that the marriage of Naiyar Sahin was solemnized with the petitioner in the year 2018. On 09.08.2023, the informant received information on mobile that his daughter has died. When the informant reached the place of occurrence, he found that both the legs of his daughter was tied with dupatta . It has been alleged that earlier the petitioner used to torture his daughter by demanding Rs. 10 lakh.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from perusal of the evidence of the doctor, it will transpire that doctor has stated in para ‘19’ of his deposition that Ecchymosis of the subcutaneous tissue was seen under the ligature mark was not the cause of death. He has also stated in para-14 of his cross-examination that injury which was found on the neck is possible by wearing a chain as well.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the opinion of the doctor regarding the cause of death is not clear as in FSL report, no poisonous substance was found in the viscera. Petitioner is the husband of the deceased.

¶21