Bibi Khatoon v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15302 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-165 Year-2024 Thana- SIKTI District- Araria ====================================================== Bibi Khatoon W/O Md. Yusuf @ Muhamad Yusuf R/O Vill.- Belguri Ward No. 14, P.S.- Sikty, Dist.- Araria.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Mukesh Kumar Rana, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 06-05-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 109 and 61(2) of the BNS and subsequently Section 103(1) of the BNS was added.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman and is in custody since 25.11.2025. It is next submitted that informant alleges that on 30.10.2024, at 08:30 p.m., petitioner called her husband and asked him to come to her house where from before Md. Mosim, Biwi Gulbano, Biwi Nazmiri, Biwi Robni and Biwi Praveen were present and when her husband reached the house of the accused persons, the accused persons twisted the neck of her husband on account of which he became injured and thereafter he was admitted in a hospital at Nepal in a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15302 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026 2/3 serious condition where he subsequently died, hence, there was delay in instituting the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that no motive for the occurrence is alleged. It is next submitted that the informant does not disclose that on what basis she came to know that at the house of the petitioner, several accused persons were present from before. It is also submitted that no doubt, the postmortem report corroborates the allegation as alleged in the FIR but then it is reiterated and submitted that informant, in the FIR, does not disclose that how she came to know that it were the accused persons including the petitioner who committed the occurrence. It is reiterated and submitted that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman. It is further submitted that if the privilege of regular bail is granted to the petitioner, the petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the trial to prove her innocence as charge-sheet has been submitted.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15302 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026 3/3
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where the case is pending in connection with Sikty P.S. Case No. 165 of 2024.
7. However, it is made clear that if the learned Trial Court comes to a conclusion that petitioner, after her release on bail, is trying to delay the framing of charge or after framing of charge is trying to delay the trial of the case in any manner, the learned Trial Court, in both the conditions, shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T