Patna High Court
Janif Baitha @ Janif BaithversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied because the application was filed after an unexplained delay and the petitioner did not demonstrate a reasonable apprehension of arrest.
Summary
The petitioner, Janif Baitha, was named in a dowry death complaint (IPC Sections 304B and 34) arising from a marriage that took place in 2013. The FIR was registered in 2019, and the petitioner applied for anticipatory bail in 2026, more than six years after the case was filed. The court examined whether the petitioner had a reasonable apprehension of arrest and considered the unexplained delay in filing the bail application. It found no credible basis for a pre‑arrest bail claim given the long lapse and lack of justification. Consequently, the court rejected the petitioner's request for anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate test for granting anticipatory bail when the application is filed after a substantial delay?
- Does the petitioner have a reasonable apprehension of arrest sufficient to justify anticipatory bail?
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 304B, 34
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry death
- IPC 304B
- delay in filing
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12216 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-329 Year-2019 Thana- BAJPATTI District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Janif Baitha @ Janif Baith Son of Chulhai Baitha Resident of Village -
Piprahi (Pipradhi), Police Station - Bajpatti, District - Sitamarhi.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Uday Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Madhura Nand Jha, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 24-02-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a complaint
case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 304B
and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. It is a case of dowry death. As per prosecution case,
marriage of daughter of informant was solemnized with co-
accused Ali Mohammad in the year 2013 and it is alleged that
after marriage, all the F.I.R. named accused persons, including
this petitioner, committed torture and harassment with the
victim due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry and later on,
they killed her.
4. Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in a case which
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12216 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026
2/2
was registered in the year 2019 and there is no plausible
explanation as to why petitioner moved this Court for grant of
pre-arrest bail after lapse of more than six years in the year
2026. The present application is highly belated and it appears
that the petitioner has got no reasonable apprehension of his
arrest in the case.
5. Considering the gross unexplained delay in moving
this pre-arrest bail application, prayer for grant of anticipatory
bail to the petitioner is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.