Sahida Khatoon @ Hamida Khatoon v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57121 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-12 Year-2025 Thana- Dagmara District- Supaul ====================================================== 1 .

Sahida Khatoon @ Hamida Khatoon W/O Israel Resident of villageKamalpur, Ward No.-6, P.S.-Daghmara , District- Supaul. 2.

Md. Israel S/O Md. Ibrahim Resident of village- Kamalpur, Ward No.-6, P.S.-Daghmara , District-Supaul.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Matloob Rab , APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 18-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for these petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State .

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a complaint case punishable for the offence under Sections 103 ( 2 ), 80 ( 2 ) and 3 (5) of BNS.

3 . As per prosecution case , daughter of informant was married with co-accused Md. Kalam in the year 2019 and after the marriage , she was subjected to cruelty and harassment by all the accused persons due to non-fulfillment of additional demand of dowry and ultimately these petitioners along with other accused persons committed the murder of informant's daughter.

4. Petitioner No. 1 is mother-in -law and petitioner No. 2 is father-in -law of the deceased. They are simply victim of over implications. Allegation of torture is generic and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57121 of 2025(3) dt.18-11-2025 2/2 ambiguous in nature without specifics of date , place and time . Petitioners are separate in mess and property and has got no concern with the family affairs of deceased and her husband. It is further orally submitted that thrust of accusation is against husband of the deceased, who is already in custody . Petitioners claim clean antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner.

6. However, considering the aforesaid facts, clean antecedent of these petitioners and circumstances, let the above named petitioners, in the event of arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned JM 1st Class Birpur District- Supaul in connection with Dagmara Case No. 12 of 2025 , subject to condition as laid down under Section 482 (2) of BNSS 2023 .

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Koushik/- U T