Patna High Court
Triloki Nath GoswamiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied as the circumstances indicated a prima facie case of murder.
Summary
The petitioner, Triloki Nath Goswami, was named in an FIR for the murder of Basuki Nath Goswami, the husband of the informant. The informant alleged that the petitioner and co‑accused killed her husband, while the petitioner claimed only suspicion, stating they were friends who had consumed alcohol and a heavy meal, leading to natural death. The State highlighted that the petitioner was present with the deceased immediately before death and that the post‑mortem report showed signs of an unnatural death, such as blood and froth from the nose and mouth. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, asserting a clean antecedent and lack of evidence. The Court, after considering the post‑mortem findings and the petitioner’s presence at the time of death, rejected the anticipatory bail application, concluding that the circumstances suggested a prima facie case of murder.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the accused was present with the deceased immediately before death and the post‑mortem indicates an unnatural death.
- Whether mere suspicion and lack of direct evidence are sufficient to deny anticipatory bail under the Indian Penal Code.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 103(1), 238, 238(5)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- murder
- post‑mortem report
- suspicion
- Indian Penal Code
- bail denial
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.54596 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-55 Year-2025 Thana- PAUTHU District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Triloki Nath Goswami S/o Vishwamitra Goswami R/o Village- Sihadi, P.S.-
Haspura, District- Aurangabad
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binod Kumar Pandey, Adv
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Navin Kr. Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
5 06-01-2026 Heard the parties.
2.The accused/petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and
apprehending his arrest in connection with Pouthu P.S. Case No.
55 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections
103(1), 238 and 238(5) of the BNS.
3. As per FIR, the informant who is the wife of the
deceased raised suspicion that this petitioner and other co-accused
persons committed murder of her husband namely Basuki Nath
Goswami. It is alleged that deceased was admittedly with
petitioner and the report of death was given over telephone to
informant by this petitioner only.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner that save and except suspicion nothing
appears available against this petitioner and petitioner being friend
of deceased husband of informant were together and consumed
alcohol and meat and due to heavy diet husband of informant died.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54596 of 2025(5) dt.06-01-2026
2/2
It is submitted that information was given by this petitioner to the
informant regarding the occurrence. While concluding argument, it
is submitted that petitioner is a man of clean antecedent.
5. Learned APP while opposing the prayer of bail
submitted that admittedly the petitioner was with deceased
husband of informant, where post-mortem report speaks that
“blood and froth coming out from nose and mouth, tongue
protruded and dark, eyes closed eyelid swelled and red
conjunctiva”, suggesting that physical assault cannot be ruled out,
though fairly conceded that viscera was preserved for forensic and
histopathology examination.
6. In view of aforesaid factual submission as admittedly
petitioner was present with deceased husband of informant
immediately preceeding his death, where post-mortem report also
suggest that death appears prima-facie unnatural contrary to the
information supplied by petitioner to the informant over phone as
per FIR, accordingly prayer of anticipatory bail of above named
petitioner stands rejected.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
S.Tripathi/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.