Tabbasum Praveen v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55316 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-425 Year-2024 Thana- RAFIGANJ District- Aurangabad ====================================================== Tabbasum Praveen W/o Kutubuddin Resident of village- Baturi, PS- Kasma, district- Aurangabad(Bihar).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Raushan Praveen W/O Modbir Alam R/O Mohalla-New Area, Ward no. 15, PS-Rafiganj, Distt-Aurangabad. At present, D/O Md. Shaukat, R/O VillageAmma, PS-Konch, Distt-Gaya(Bihar). ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Kamlendra Prasad Singh, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Amit Anand, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 10-12-2025 Heard Mr. Kamlendra Prasad Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Amit Anand, learned counsel representing the informant as also learned APP representing the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending her arrest in connection with Rafiganj P.S. Case No. 425 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 198(A) of the Indian Penal Code and section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and section 4 of the Muslim Women Act, 2019, lodged on 04.06.2024 by the informant Raushan Praveen.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that with the active role of this petitioner, she got married with Modasir Alam on 27.05.2022. The lady claims herself to be the cousin maternal mother-in-law but later it came to notice that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55316 of 2025(4) dt.10-12-2025 2/2 she has illicit relationship with her husband and also ensured that valuable properties are alienated by her husband. A panchayati took place but the torture continued and ultimately she was thrown out from the house. This led to the F.I.R.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that she has no role to play in the matter, only because she was a mediator for the said marriage, got implicated.
5. Learned counsel representing the informant on the other hand has countered the said version and submits that it is only because of this lady that the torture continued, the land was alienated and further, the undisputed photographs have been produced to show that she has illicit relationship with her husband.
6. Taking into account the aforesaid fact, it would be appropriate that the petitioner seek bail.
7. The anticipatory bail application stands rejected.
8. However, if the petitioner surrenders within a period of four weeks, files bail application, the court concerned shall consider the matter and dispose it of preferably on the same day. (Rajiv Roy, J) vinayak/- U T