Arshadi @ Arshadi Begum v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.59672 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-7 Year-2025 Thana- FATEHPUR District- Kishanganj ====================================================== Arshadi @ Arshadi Begum W/O Md. Sohel Alam @ Sohel Resident of Bairiya, P.S. - Fatehpur, District - Kishanganj ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Raj Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Gauri Shankar Gupta, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 03-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections u/s 103 (1), 238, 61 (2), 3
(5) of the BNS.
3. As per prosecution case, informant Noman Alam stated that he and his brother Mujammil Hussain were residing at Ahemdabad. Since last one year his brother was doing agriculture work at village Bairiya on his paternal land. His brother was killed on 27-02-2025 and his dead body was kept in his house secretly. His uncle informed him in this regard. Informant came at his house and saw the dead body. There was black mark on neck of the dead body and injury marks on other parts of the body. On the pressure of people of locality, the informant did not inform to the police with regard to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59672 of 2025(4) dt.03-12-2025 2/3 occurrence and postmortem of dead body was also not done. The informant further raised suspicion against the petitioner, and co-accused Sohel and Salamuddin. He has further alleged that the petitioner was well acquainted with deceased lady before her marriage and due to this reason there was differences between husband and wife.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence. Suspicion has been raised against the petitioner on the ground that petitioner had acquaintance with the deceased and he used to talk with her. During investigation, none of the witnesses claimed to have seen this petitioner to commit offence. Charge has already been framed. Petitioner claims clean antecedent and he is in custody since 17.4.2024.
5. Learned counsel for the State and the informant oppose the prayer for bail.
6. Considering the nature of accusation, materials collected during investigation and period of custody of the petitioner who is a lady, prayer for regular bail is allowed. Let the petitioner, mentioned above, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sessions
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59672 of 2025(4) dt.03-12-2025 3/3 Judge, Kishanganj in Sessions Trial No. 183/2025. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Shashi U T