Angoori Khatoon @ Anguri Khatoon v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46286 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-486 Year-2019 Thana- SAKRA District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Angoori Khatoon @ Anguri Khatoon W/O Md. Safique @ Salique Resident of Village- Saraiya, P.S- Sakra, District- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Aisysha Khatoon W/O Late Md. Phool Babu R/O Sakra Pandepur, P.SSakra, Distt.- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Upendra Kumar Chaubey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ashok Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 11-07-2025 Heard Mr.Upendra Kumar Chaubey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Ashok Kumar Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 15.04.2025 in connection with Sakra P.S. Case No. 486 of 2019, F.I.R. dated 17.10.2019 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 323,341,326,498(A),307,34 of IPC.

3. The informant alleged that she married her daughter, Mina Khattoon, with Md. Safique three years ago. After some time her son-in-law and his second wife started assaulting her daughter. It is further alleged that Md. Safique and Anguri Khatoon, second wife of Md. Safique, cut the

2/4 tongue of her daughter with a sharp edged weapon.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and she has falsely been implicated in the present case. Petitioner is the first wife of co-accused person, namely, Md. Shafique. As per allegation in the FIR, petitioner has helped the co-accused person, namely, Md. Safique, who happens to the husband of the petitioner to cut the injury of his second wife of the co-accused person. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although there is allegation in the FIR but the informant is not the eye witness of the alleged occurrence and merely on the basis of the suspicion she has filed the present FIR and apart from that, the co-accused person, namely, Md.

Safique, who happens to be the husband of the petitioner, has entered into a compromise, with the informant namely, Aiysha Khatoon and both are living together. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that coaccused person, namely, Md. Safique, against whom the similar allegation that he has cut the tongue of his wife, has been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 17.11.2021 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 14453/2021 and the police, after investigation, submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 15.04.2025.

3/4

5. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid fact, petitioner has clean antecedent, there is no specific allegation against the petitioner in the FIR and only allegation against the petitioner is that she has helped the co-accused person and said co-accused person has been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, East Muzaffarpur in connection with Sakra P.S. Case No. 486 of 2019, with the following conditions:- (I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. (II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(III) And, further condition that the court below shall

4/4 verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T