Patna High Court
Md. Mahfuz @ RazaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The anticipatory bail petition was denied.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Mahfuz, husband of a woman who died under suspicious circumstances, filed an anticipatory bail petition after being implicated in a dowry death case under Sections 304B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. He contended that he never demanded dowry, did not torture the deceased, and that the prosecution’s case was fabricated, noting that the deceased had been residing with him in Delhi before falling ill and dying. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the direct allegation of dowry harassment and the unnatural death of the wife within seven years of marriage. The court examined the seriousness of the allegations and the risk of the petitioner influencing the investigation. Concluding that the allegations were specific and serious, the court rejected the petition for anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner accused under IPC Sections 304B and 34 in a dowry death case
- Whether the allegations against the petitioner constitute sufficient ground to deny bail
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 304B, 34
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry death
- IPC 304B
- Section 34
- criminal procedure
- bail denial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83909 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-415 Year-2023 Thana- BIRAUL District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Md. Mahfuz @ Raza Son of Late Abdul Samad Resident of Village-
Sekhpura, P.S.- Biraul, District- Darbhanga
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Subhash Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 06-01-2026 Heard Mr. S.K.Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner
and Mr.P.K.Pandey, learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case,
registered for the offence under Section 304(B) /34 of the Indian
Penal Code.
3. It is a case of ‘Dowry Death’. As per F.I.R., the
daughter of the informant was married with this petitioner on
29.09.2022 and after the marriage, she was subjected to cruelty
and harassment by all the accused persons including petitioner
due to non-fulfillment of Rs. 2,00,000/- and a motorcycle, in the
form of dowry, and on 02.06.2023, the informant received an
information that his daughter has been murdered by the accused
persons.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and has been implicated in this case
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83909 of 2025(2) dt.06-01-2026
2/2
merely because he happens to be husband of the deceased.
Informant is not eye-witness to the occurrence. Petitioner
neither demanded any dowry nor committed any torture to the
deceased. The entire prosecution case is out-and-out false,
concocted and baseless. In fact, the deceased was living with her
husband (petitioner) in Delhi and suddenly she became ill and
hospitalized and in course of treatment, she died. The informant
and other family members took part in last rites of deceased, but
only with a oblique motive, this false and concocted case has
been lodged by informant. Petitioner claims clean antecedent.
5. However, learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the
bail petition and submits that petitioner is husband of deceased
and there is specific and direct allegation against him of
committing torture and demanding dowry. Deceased died in an
unnatural circumstances within seven years of marriage at her
matrimonial home.
6. Considering the same, the prayer for anticipatory
bail of petitioner is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
anay
U T
Checking your session…