IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69441 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-333 Year-2024 Thana- NOORSARAI District- Nalanda ====================================================== Shravan Ram @ Shravan Kumar S/O late Sh. Amrit Ram Village - Badauri, P.S. - Parwalpur, Dist. - Nalanda, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sukesh Ranjan, Adv. For the State : Mr.J.N. Thakur, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 5 05-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State. 2. In this case, the petitioner is seeking regular bail in connection with Noorsarai P.S. Case No. 333 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 238 and 3(5) of BNS. 3. A semi-decomposed dead body was recovered from the river. The dead body was identified as of the wife of the petitioner. According to the allegations, the petitioner after solemnizing marriage with the deceased, was residing in Surat, Gujarat. Few days prior to the occurrence, he came from Gujarat and kept the deceased in the house of his brother-in-law (Saala) namely Tuntun Ram. The petitioner was already married to one Aarti Devi. During investigation, it came to light that 4-5 days Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69441 of 2025(5) dt.05-02-2026 2/2 prior to the lodging of the FIR, some quarrel had taken place between the deceased and her nanad, Babita Devi. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated. None has seen the occurrence. Except suspicion, there is nothing against the petitioner. The petitioner is under custody since 29.11.2024. 5. On the other hand, Mr. J.N. Thakur, the learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that the deceased is second wife of the petitioner. The accused persons committed murder of the deceased and threw the dead body into the river. The complicity of the petitioner and other accused transpired in the confessional statement of Babita Devi (nanad of the deceased). In her confessional statement, Babita Devi had given the vivid description of the entire occurrence. 6. Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, the petitioner doesn’t deserve the privileges for bail. Accordingly, it is rejected. kundan/- (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) U T