Patna High Court

Md. Kasim @ Kasim MiyanversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 21 January 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: PARTHA SARTHY

Holding

The court held that bail could not be granted as the allegations of murder and supporting post‑mortem evidence warranted the petitioner’s continued custody.

Summary

The petitioner, Md. Kasim Miyan, applied for regular bail under sections 80 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in a murder case linked to a dowry dispute. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner and his wife, as father‑in‑law and mother‑in‑law of the deceased, participated in the strangulation murder of the informant’s sister‑in‑law, a claim supported by the post‑mortem report indicating asphyxia due to partial strangulation. The petitioner contended he was falsely implicated, had no criminal record, and was merely a resident separate from his son’s family affairs. The State and the informant opposed bail, emphasizing the direct allegations in the FIR and the forensic evidence. After considering the seriousness of the allegations and the medical findings, the court declined to grant bail and dismissed the application.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail under sections 80 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in view of the murder allegations and post‑mortem findings.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 3(5), 80

Subjects

regular bail
murder
dowry death
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
section 80
section 3(5)
post‑mortem report
asphyxia
strangulation

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76168 of 2025
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-166 Year-2025 Thana- NARPATGANJ District- Araria
                 ======================================================
                 Md. Kasim @ Kasim Miyan S/o Late Jinnat Miyan R/o Village - Jhingali
                 Chowk, Ward No. 05, P.S - Narpatganj, District - Araria
                                                                               ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                  Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s    :        Mr. Vijay Kishore Bharti, Advocate
                 For the State           :        Mr. Kalyan Shankar, APP
                 For the Informant       :        Mr. Rohit Kumar, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   21-01-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP

                   for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

                                 2. The petitioner has preferred this application for

                   grant of regular bail in connection with Narpatganj P.S. Case no.

                   166 of 2025 registered under sections 80 and 3(5) of the

                   Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

                                 3. As per the prosecution case, over non-fulfillment of

                   the demand of dowry, it is stated that the petitioner and his wife

                   who happened to be the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the

                   deceased committed the murder of the sister-in-law (nanad) of

                   the informant. Allegations are levelled against the husband of

                   the deceased also.

                                 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner

                   that the petitioner is the father-in-law of the deceased. He lives
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76168 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
                                                       2/2




                     separately and has no concern with the family affairs of his son and

                     the daughter-in-law. He has been falsely implicated in the case. No

                     such occurrence as alleged in the FIR has taken place. The petitioner

                     who is a 50 year old person has no criminal antecedent and is in

                     custody since 12.5.2025.

                                  5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP

                     for the State and learned counsel for the informant. Learned

                     counsel for the informant submits that the petitioner who

                     happens to be the father-in-law of the deceased is named in the

                     FIR and there is direct allegation against him and his wife of

                     having committed the murder of the nanad of the informant by

                     strangulation. The allegations are supported from the post-

                     mortem report.

                                  6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                     taking into consideration the allegations against the petitioner in

                     the FIR and the contents of the post-mortem report wherein the

                     cause of death is said to be due to asphyxia as a result of partial

                     strangulation, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on

                     bail and the application is rejected.



                                                 (Partha Sarthy, J)
sauravkrsinha/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…