Dismissed¶20

Irshad @ Md. Irshad Alam v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC16 May 2025CR. MISC./7346/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court, CR. MISC. No.7346 of 2025, decided 16-05-2025 by Justice Arun Kumar Jha: bail application of Irshad @ Md. Irshad Alam rejected in Simri Bakhtiyarpur P.S. Case No. 319 of 2024 (District Saharsa) - murder allegation, strong circumstantial evidence, deceased last seen at petitioner's shop, decomposed body recovered at petitioner's instance, no eyewitness, custody since 30.07.2024, charge sheet submitted; S. 140(3) IPC and Ss. 103(1), 238, 61(2) BNS; trial court directed to expedite and conclude trial at the earliest.

What did the court decide?

Having regard to the serious nature of allegation and strong circumstantial evidence, the court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. ¶19

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7346 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-319 Year-2024 Thana- SIMRI BAKHTIYARPUR DistrictSaharsa

¶3

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

¶4

Irshad @ Md. Irshad Alam S/o- Md. Irfan Alam @ Mohammad Irfan Alam Village- Purani Bazar Bakhtiyarpur Ps- Simri Bakhtiyarpur Dist- Saharsa

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Amarnath Jha, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs.Rita Verma, A.P.P. ======================================================

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶10

3 16-05-2025

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶12

A.P.P. for the State.

¶13

In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with Simri Bakhtiyarpur P.S. Case No. 319 of 2024, registered for the offences under Section 140(3) of the Indian Penal Code and subsequently added offences under Section 103(1), 238, 61(2) of the B.N.S.

¶14

As per the prosecution case, the son of the informant went for his work and did not return. Subsequently, the name of the petitioner transpired as the person who murdered the son of the informant and buried the dead body.

¶15

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. No occurrence as alleged has ever taken place. The name of the petitioner transpired in this

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7346 of 2025(3) dt.16-05-2025 2/2

¶17

case merely on suspicion. There is no eye witness to the occurrence. Only on the basis of circumstantial evidence, the petitioner has been arraigned in this case as accused. The petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 30.07.2024 and charge sheet has been submitted.

¶18

Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State opposes the submission made on behalf of the petitioner. Learned A.P.P. submits that the son of the informant went to the shop of the petitioner where he was last seen and thereafter at the instance of the petitioner, dead body was recovered in a decomposed condition.

¶19