Raushan Tara Khatoon v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70970 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-71 Year-2025 Thana- Manuapul District- West Champaran ====================================================== 1.
Raushan Tara Khatoon W/O Nasir Miyan Resident of village- Bharpatiya, Ward No.-13, P.S.- Manuapul, Dist.- West Champaran 2.
Rayees Miyan @ Rayees Ansari S/O Nasir Miyan Resident of villageBharpatiya, Ward No.-13, P.S.- Manuapul, Dist.- West Champaran 3.
Astab Miyan @ Md. Ali Ajam S/O Late Manauwar Miyan Resident of village- Bharpatiya, Ward No.-13, P.S.- Manuapul, Dist.- West Champaran 4.
Anjum Ara Khatoon @ Anjum Ara W/O Jahiruddin Miyan Resident of village- Bharpatiya, Ward No.-13, P.S.- Manuapul, Dist.- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sharad Kumar Verma For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Anil Kumar Mr. Sachida Nand Rai ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR ORAL ORDER 08-10-2025 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109(1), 76, 303(3)/3(5), 351(2), 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the informant's daughter was allegedly assaulted by the accused persons, including the petitioners, when she was returning home from coaching. Upon query by the informant, the accused persons, armed with a farsa, gadasa, and rod,
2/4 allegedly abused, assaulted, and disrobed the informant, also causing injuries to her two daughters. It is alleged that while fleeing, petitioner no. 4 snatched a gold chain from the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. The allegations leveled against the petitioners are general and omnibus in nature. There is no specific allegation for causing injuries. It is further submitted that there is a case and a counter-case between the parties for the alleged incident. The specific allegation of causing injuries to the informant's daughter, namely, Rumi Khatoon, is appended as Annexure-3, for which the counsel for the petitioner undertakes that Petitioner No. 3 is ready to pay Rs. 5,000/- by way of a demand draft in her name for medical treatment, without accepting his guilt. Lastly, it is submitted that except Petitioner No. 2, Petitioners Nos. 1, 3, and 4 have one criminal antecedent each.
5. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
3/4 case, let the above-named petitioners be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, West Champaran at Bettiah/ Successor Court in connection with Manuapul P.S. Case No. 71 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS and further on production of the receipt showing deposit of Rs. 5,000/- towards Rumi Khatoon, as well as the following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors should be the family member/relative of the petitioner(s) who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his/her/their bail bond by the Trial Court itself; (iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;
4/4 (iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds. (Ajit Kumar, J) shikha/- U T