Raushan Parveen v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10414 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-176 Year-2024 Thana- SAKRI District- Madhubani ====================================================== 1.

Raushan Parveen W/O Md. Gulab R/O Vill.- Sakri Dafadar Tola, Ward No.- 12, P.S.- Sakri, Distt.- Madhubani.

2.

Md. Alkama S/O Md. Gulab R/O Vill.- Sakri Dafadar Tola, Ward No.- 12, P.S.- Sakri, Distt.- Madhubani.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Kumari Pallavi For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Chandra Bhushan Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 17-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Sakri P.S. Case No. 176 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103, 3(5) of the BNS.

3. The informant Sajda Praveen, lodged an FIR stating that her maternal uncle Md. Gulab (co-accused), informed her that her maternal grandmother had died, due to heart attack. The informant went to the house of her maternal grandmother and saw her dead body. She noticed a black mark around the neck of the deceased which, according to the informant, was a ligature mark, showing that the deceased was done to death by strangulation. The informant came to know that the co-accused Md. Gulab, his wife Raushan Praveen and his son Md. Alkaum had an altercation with the deceased one day prior to the occurrence and the dispute was pacified by the villagers. The informant expressed her firm belief that due to the previous altercation, the co-accused Md. Gulab, his

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10414 of 2025(4) dt.17-09-2025 2/2 wife petitioner no. 1 and his son petitioner no. 2 had committed the murder of her maternal grandmother by strangulation.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the husband of petitioner no. 1, co-accused Md. Gulab, informed the informant about the death of the deceased and petitioner no. 1 and 2 are his wife and sons. He has further submitted that according to the post-mortem report, the probable cause of death is asphyxia.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that one day prior to the occurrence, the petitioners and co-accused Md. Gulab had an altercation with the deceased. A ligature mark was found around the neck of the deceased. He has further submitted that in paragraph no. 13 of the case diary, the son of the deceased has also corroborated the allegation. He has also submitted that processes under Sections 82 and 83 of the CrPC have been initiated against the petitioners.

6. In my view, the petitioners do not deserve the privilege of bail, which is hereby rejected.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Nirmal/- U T