Sayera Khatoon @ Sayara Khatoon @ SayaraversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23266 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-448 Year-2025 Thana- RAXAUL District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
           1.     Sayera Khatoon @ Sayara Khatoon @ Sayara W/o Akbar Miyan Resident of
                  Village - Hardiya, P.S. - Raxaul, Dist. - East Champaran.
           2.    Akbar Mian @ Akbar Miyan Son of Gaazi Miyan @ Gaji Miyan Resident of
                 Village - Hardiya, P.S. - Raxaul, Dist. - East Champaran.
           3.    Rahmat Miyan @ Sahmat Hawari @ Rahmat Hawari Son of Akbar Mian @
                 Akbar Miyan Resident of Village - Hardiya, P.S. - Raxaul, Dist. - East
                 Champaran.

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Ms. Harsha Saswat, Adv.
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Md. Shakir Ahmad, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   04-06-2026                     Heard learned Advocate for the petitioners and

                   learned Advocate for the State through virtual mode.

                                2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection

                   with Raxaul P.S. Case No.448 of 2025 registered for the

                   offences punishable under Sections 80 and 3(5) of the BNS,

                   2023.

                                3. Based upon the written report, the prosecution

                   alleges that the daughter of the informant had solemnized a love

                   marriage with the son of petitioner nos. 1 and 2. Out of the said

                   wedlock, the couple also blessed with two children, aged about

                   four years and two-and-a-half years, respectively.It is further
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23266 of 2026(3) dt.04-06-2026
                                            2/4




          alleged that soon after the marriage, the daughter of the

          informant was subjected to demands for dowry and, on account

          of the non-fulfilment thereof, was subjected to cruelty and

          harassment in various forms. The prosecution further alleges

          that she was ultimately strangulated to death and, with a view to

          portraying the occurrence as a case of suicide, the accused

          persons allegedly hanged her from a ceiling fan.

                       4. Learned Advocate for the petitioners contended that

          the deceased and her husband had been living a conjugal happy

          married life separately from their family members. However, on

          account of some trivial dispute between them, the deceased

          committed suicide on a heat of rage. It is further contended that

          petitioner no.1 happens to be mother-in-law, petitioner no. 2 is

          the father-in-law and petitioner no.3 is the brother-in-law of the

          deceased. During the course of investigation, no cogent material

          has surfaced to indicate their involvement in the alleged demand

          for dowry or in subjecting the deceased to cruelty. It is also

          contended that the police sent the dead body for post-mortem

          examination and the viscera was also forwarded to the Forensic

          Science Laboratory for analysis. Prima facie, both the post-

          mortem report and the FSL report suggest that the deceased died

          as a result of suicidal hanging. It is further pointed out that no
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23266 of 2026(3) dt.04-06-2026
                                            3/4




          external ante-mortem injury was found on the body of the

          deceased. Lastly, it is contended that since the marriage between

          the deceased and her husband was a love marriage solemnized

          out of mutual affection, there was no occasion for any demand

          of dowry. It is submitted that, owing to certain matrimonial

          discord between the husband and wife, the deceased, in a

          moment of emotional distress, appears to have taken the

          extreme step of ending her life.

                       5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State

          vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that

          during the course of investigation, all the witnesses have

          supported the prosecution case that the deceased was subjected

          to demand of dowry and torture due to which either she

          committed suicide or she was hanged.

                       6. Having considered the submissions advanced by

          the learned Advocates for the respective parties and taking note

          of the fact that the petitioners are none else but the parents-in-

          law and brother-in-law of the deceased and they have been

          living separately from the deceased and her husband, besides the

          postmortem report clearly suggests that it is a case of suicide by

          hanging and there is no mark of external injuries as well as the

          fair antecedent of the petitioners, let the above named
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23266 of 2026(3) dt.04-06-2026
                                                          4/4




                        petitioners, be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or

                        surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four

                        weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/-

                        (Twenty thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount

                        each to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial

                        Magistrate, Motihari, East Champaran in connection with

                        Raxaul P.S. Case No.448 of 2025, subject to the condition as

                        laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, with further

                        condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family

                        members of the petitioners.



                                                    (Harish Kumar, J)
rohit/-

U         T