Mohammad Matloob Alam @ Md. Matlub Alam @ Md. Matloob Alam v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15966 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-262 Year-2025 Thana- CHAKAND District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.
Mohammad Matloob Alam @ Md. Matlub Alam @ Md. Matloob Alam S/o Mohammed Ehtesham R/o Village - Bara, P.O - Bara, P.S - Chakand, District - Gaya 2.
Kafila Khatoon W/o Md. Matlub @ Md. Matlub Alam @ Matlub Alam @ Md. Matloob Alam R/o Village - Bara, P.O - Bara, P.S - Chakand, District - Gaya 3.
Shabnam Khatoon @ Shabnam Praween W/o Md. Dilshad R/o Village - Kesru Dharampur, P.S - C.D Town Block, Gaya, District - Gaya 4.
Sajid Alam @ Md. Shazid Alam S/o Md. Matlub Alam @ Matlub Alam @ Md. Matloob Alam R/o Village - Bara, P.O - Bara, P.S - Chakand, District - Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Satyam Shivam Sundram, Adv.
Mr.Ankit, Adv.
Mr. Aman Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Satyendra Narain Singh,APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 08-07-2026 Heard Mr. Satyam Shivam Sundram, learned Advocate for the petitioners and Mr. Satyendra Narain Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Chakand P.S. Case No. 262 of 2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103/3(5) of the BNS.
3. Based upon the written report, the prosecution alleges that the marriage of the informant was solemnized with the son of the petitioners No. 1 and 2 in the year 2009; the
2/4 couple was also blessed with two children. After a few years of marriage, a dispute has arisen between the petitioners and informant's husband with respect to share of land and in order to settle the dispute, when the husband of the informant came to his parental house, a quarrel took place, which incidence was also brought to the knowledge of the informant telephonically. Subsequently, on account of such dispute all the accused persons, including the petitioners caused death of the informant's husband.
4.Learned Advocate for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are none else but the parents-in-law and own brother and sister. In fact, on account of matrimonial discord between the informant and the deceased, the deceased had gone to her parental home, where he had a telephonic conversation with his wife and in a fit of passion, the deceased committed suicide. During the course of the investigation, the police found that it was a case of suicide, which is also corroborated by the post-mortem report. The post-mortem report clearly reveals that the death was caused due to asphyxia resulting from hanging. There was no mark of any external injury over any part of the body. It is lastly contended that there is hardly any possibility that the parents would kill their own son in order to give an
3/4 advantage or a larger share of the property to their other son and daughter. It is also contended that one of the co-accused person namely, Shaziya Khatoon @ Shaziya Praween, who was also facing identical allegation, has been extended the privilege of anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 10736 of 2026 vide order dated 23.02.2026.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that during the course of investigation, the statements of the witnesses were recorded, who supported the prosecution case and the motive is writ large, as the petitioners wanted to grab the share of the informant's husband for which dispute was going on.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned Advocates for the respective parties and considering the fact that the informant is not an eye witness to the alleged occurrence and the postmortem report suggests that the deceased had committed suicide by hanging and there was no mark of any external injury and, the petitioners are own parents and siblings, let the petitioners abovenamed be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of
4/4 receipt/production of a copy of this order, upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned ACJM-V, Gaya Jee in connection with Chakand P.S. Case No. 262 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, with the further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioners.
(Harish Kumar, J) Anjani/- U T