Patna High Court
MD. IMTIYAZversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail should not be granted to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Imtiyaz, was charged under Sections 103(1), 85 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 read with Sections 3 and 4 of the DP Act for alleged dowry‑related torture and the death of his wife. He sought regular bail, asserting a clean antecedent, that the informant was not an eye‑witness and that the allegations were based merely on suspicion. The State opposed bail, highlighting that the deceased’s body was found inside the petitioner’s house with injuries and a post‑mortem report confirming death by strangulation. The court examined the post‑mortem findings and the circumstances of the body’s discovery, concluding that the seriousness of the offence and the evidentiary material did not justify granting bail. Accordingly, the bail petition was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail in a dowry‑death case under the BNS, 2023 and DP Act.
- Whether the post‑mortem report and the location of the body constitute sufficient grounds to deny bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- dowry death
- bail
- post‑mortem
- strangulation
- Domestic Violence Act
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89975 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-283 Year-2024 Thana- RAGHOPUR District- Supaul
======================================================
MD. IMTIYAZ Son of Md. Jaffir @ Md. Jafir Alam @ Md. Japheer Resident
of village - Hulas, Ward No.- 13, Vichari, P.S.- Raghopur, District - Supaul
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Nafisu Zzoha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Parmanand Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 11-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Raghopur Case No. 283 of 2024 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections Sections 103(1), 85 and 3(5) of the
BNS, 2023 read with Section 3 /4 of the DP Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is in custody
since 28-5-2025 and the informant alleges that his sister was
married to the petitioner in the year 2017 and out of the
wedlock, two children were born, further for the last two years,
the named accused persons including the petitioner were
demanding dowry of Rs. 10 Lakhs and for non fulfillment of the
demand, the victim was tortured, further on 16.08.2024,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89975 of 2025(2) dt.11-03-2026
2/3
informant was informed that his sister has been brutally
assaulted, and thus has died, accordingly, he reached the place
of occurrence and saw the dead body of his sister lying and
blood was found spread over the verandah and the accused
persons had fled.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner, being husband, has been falsely implicated in the
instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that
informant is not an eye-witness to the occurrence and the entire
allegation hinges around suspicion. It is further submitted that
the marriage of the petitioner with the deceased was more than 8
years old and out of the wedlock, two children were born, but in
these eight years, no case ever came to be instituted either by
the informant or the deceased alleging torture on account of
non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.
5. On query of the court with regard to postmortem
report, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has
copy of the case diary and after perusing the same submits that
postmortem records that death was on account of cardiogenic
respiratory failure due to strangulation.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
bail of the petitioner and submits that what is not in dispute
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89975 of 2025(2) dt.11-03-2026
3/3
rather stands admitted is that the wife of the petitioner died and
her dead body was also found in the house of the petitioner and
the postmortem records the cause of death as cardiogenic
respiratory failure due to strangulation. It is also submitted that
postmortem clearly records the cause of death is on account of
cardiogenic respiratory failure on account of strangulation. It is
further submitted that whether the petitioner was involved in the
occurrence or not is an aspect of trial, but since the dead body
was found inside the house of the petitioner with marks of
injuries coupled with the fact that strangulation is recorded in
the postmortem, as such the instant case is not a fit case for
grant of regular bail.
7. Considering the submission made by learned APP,
the Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail.
8. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is
rejected.
9. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that charges against the petitioner has been framed on
23-9-2025.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…