Patna High Court
Bibi Ruksana @ Munni @ RuksanaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The Court rejected the petition for anticipatory bail, holding that the petitioner’s alleged participation warrants denial of bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Bibi Ruksana, sought anticipatory bail in a case where she was alleged to have handed a gun to her son, who then fired it, causing a death. The FIR charges her under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The petitioner claimed innocence, arguing that the allegations were vague and that the actual firing was done by co‑accused. The informant and the State contended that the petitioner shared a common intention by providing the weapon, making her liable. After hearing both sides, the Court declined to grant anticipatory bail, finding sufficient grounds to suspect her involvement.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Arms Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s act of handing over the firearm constitutes participation in the offence under the doctrine of common intention.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 3(5)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- common intention
- Arms Act
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal procedure
- firearm offence
- murder
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22626 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1054 Year-2025 Thana- SAHARSA SADAR District- Saharsa
======================================================
Bibi Ruksana @ Munni @ Ruksana W/o Md. Shahid @ Chapariya Resident
of Village- Sulindabad ward no. 06/13, P.S.- Saharsa, Dist.- Saharsa
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Chandra Mohan Jha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Jagdhar Prasad, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Prasoon Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
2 16-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP
for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection
with Saharsa Sadar P.S. Case No. 1054 of 2025, dated
12.09.2025, lodged under Sections 103(1) & 3(5) of the
Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as “BNS,
2023”) and under Section 27 of the Arms Act, pending before
the Court of C.J.M., Saharsa.
3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against
three named accused persons, including the present petitioner.
The specific allegation against the present petitioner is that, on
demand, she brought a gun from the house and handed it over to
her son, by which firing was made in the chest, due to which the
victim died.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22626 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
2/2
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel
further submits that the antecedent of the petitioner is clean.
Counsel further submits that the allegations are general and
omnibus in nature. Counsel further submits that the allegation of
firing is against the other accused persons.
5. Learned counsel for the informant vehemently
opposes the prayer for bail and submits that though the
allegation of firing is not against the petitioner, there was a
common intention, and it is for this reason the gun was brought
by the petitioner and handed over to the co-accused, who fired.
6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
bail of the petitioner.
7. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is
not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is
hereby rejected.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Aman Kumar/-
U T
Checking your session…