Patna High Court
Sakir AliversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to strict conditions.
Summary
Petitioner Sakir Ali was arrested on 6 March 2025 in connection with a murder case (Sessions Trial No. 648 of 2025) arising from a dowry‑related killing alleged under Sections 80, 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S, 2023. The prosecution contended that the petitioner, as the husband of the deceased, participated in the killing of the informant’s sister for non‑payment of dowry. The defence argued that the petitioner has a clean antecedent, the FIR is fabricated, there is no eye‑witness, and the only basis for accusation is his marital relationship; moreover, two trial witnesses have turned hostile. The court noted the lack of supportive testimony, the petitioner’s prolonged custody since March 2025, and the possibility of securing his presence, and therefore granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of antecedents. The bail order was directed to be implemented by the District and Additional Sessions Judge, Bagaha.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the serious nature of the offences alleged under the B.N.S, 2023.
- Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case sufficient to deny bail, considering hostile witnesses and lack of eye‑witness.
- Whether there is a risk of the petitioner tampering with evidence or fleeing the jurisdiction.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 3(5), 351(2), 352, 80
Subjects
- bail
- dowry death
- murder
- hostile witnesses
- criminal procedure
- B.N.S 2023
- pre‑trial detention
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67700 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-23 Year-2025 Thana- BHITAHA District- West Champaran
======================================================
Sakir Ali Son of Balistar Gaddi Resident of Village - Hirasoti, Police Station -
Bhitaha, District - West Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Milind Kumar Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ram Priya Sharan Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 19-03-2026 Heard Mr.Milind Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr.Ram Priya Sharan Singh, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 06.03. 2025
in connection with Sessions Trial No. 648 of 2025 arising out of
Bhitaha P.S. Case No. 23 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 25.02.2025 for the
offences punishable under Sections 80, 352, 351 (2) and 3 (5) of
B.N.S, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, petitioner and others
killed the sister of the informant for non-fulfillment of demand of
dowry.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner
has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present
case. Allegation as alleged in the F.I.R is false and fabricated. The
petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. It
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67700 of 2025(4) dt.19-03-2026
2/3
appears from the F.I.R itself that informant is not an eye witness of
the alleged occurrence and petitioner has been accused in this case
only on the ground that petitioner is the husband of the deceased.
Learned counsel further submits that it appears from paragraph 33 of
the case diary that relevant witness Manjur Ali stated that the
petitioner has hired the vehicle of Manjur Ali for treatment of the
deceased but in the midst of Gorakhpur it has been found that she has
died and police after investigation submitted charge sheet. Petitioner
is in custody since 06.03.2025. Learned counsel further submits that
trial has begun and two of the witness have been examined and both
of the witnesses have become hostile.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
witnesses have not supported the case of prosecution in the trial and
the petitioner is in custody since 06.03.2025, let the petitioner, above
named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-1st
Bagaha, West Champaran in connection with Sessions Trial No. 648
of 2025, arising out of Bhitaha P.S. Case No. 23 of 2025, subject to
the following conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67700 of 2025(4) dt.19-03-2026
3/3
shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his
absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail
bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for
cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is
found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the
court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the
petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the
above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the
name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
vashudha/-
U T
Checking your session…