Patna High Court
Hadisha KhatoonversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- PARTLY ALLOWED (DISPOSAL)
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
The court granted bail to petitioners 1 and 7‑10 subject to surrender within four weeks and compliance with bail bond conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, members of the same family, were accused of murdering the informant’s sister, allegedly by assault with lathi and danda, though the post‑mortem indicated death by hanging. Petitioners 2‑6 withdrew their bail application and sought regular bail, which the court permitted. The remaining petitioners (1 and 7‑10) faced charges under Sections 85, 103, 351(2), 352/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, with the State opposing bail. The court noted that the allegations were general and omnibus and that the presumption under Section 80 of the BNSS did not apply because the death occurred after ten years of marriage. Considering the circumstances, the court ordered that petitioners 1 and 7‑10 be released on bail if they surrender within four weeks, upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to petitioners 1 and 7‑10 despite charges of murder, dowry harassment and other offences under the BNSS and Dowry Prohibition Act.
- Whether the presumption of culpability under Section 80 of the BNSS is attracted in this case.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) — s. 103, 351(2), 352/3(5), 482(2), 85
- Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) — s. 438(2)
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- presumption of culpability
- murder
- dowry prohibition
- omnibus allegations
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24780 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-95 Year-2025 Thana- MANPUR District- West Champaran
======================================================
1. Hadisha Khatoon W/o- Ahmad Miyan R/v- Laukar Ps- Manpur Dist- West
Champaran
2. Sakim Miyan S/o- Ahmad Miyan R/v- Laukar Ps- Manpur Dist- West
Champaran
3. Bhulan Miyan S/o- Ahmad Miyan R/v- Laukar Ps- Manpur Dist- West
Champaran
4. Mokim Miyan S/o- Ahmad Miyan R/v- Laukar Ps- Manpur Dist- West
Champaran
5. Rojid Miyan S/o- Ahmad Miyan R/v- Laukar Ps- Manpur Dist- West
Champaran
6. Anjarul Miyan @ Anjarul Alam S/o- Ahmad Miyan R/v- Laukar Ps- Manpur
Dist- West Champaran
7. Vigan Khatoon W/o- Sakim Miyan R/v- Laukar Ps- Manpur Dist- West
Champaran
8. Salma Khatoon W/o- Mokim Miyan R/v- Laukar Ps- Manpur Dist- West
Champaran
9. Khushboon Khatoon W/o- Bhulan Miyan R/v- Laukar Ps- Manpur Dist-
West Champaran
10. Moriyam Khatoon W/o- Rojid Miyan R/v- Laukar Ps- Manpur Dist- West
Champaran
... ... Petitioners.
Versus
The State of Bihar. ... ... Opposite Party.
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioners : Ms. Harsha Shaswat, Advocate
Mr. Sharad Kumar Verma, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Umesh Lal Verma, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
2 30-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
APP for the State.
2. At the very outset, Ms. Harsha Shaswat, learned
counsel for the petitioners, seeks permission to withdraw this
application with regard to petitioner nos.2 to 6 to surrender
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24780 of 2026(2) dt.30-04-2026
2/3
before the learned Court below and seek regular bail.
3. Permission is accorded.
4. Accordingly, this application is dismissed as
withdrawn with regard to petitioner nos.2 to 6. However, if they
surrender before the learned Court below and seek regular bail,
the same would be considered on their own merits without being
prejudiced by this withdrawal order.
5. Now, this application survives only for petitioner
nos.1 and 7 to 10.
6. The petitioner nos.1 and 7 to 10 apprehend their
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 85, 103, 351(2), 352/3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section ¾
of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
7. The sister of the informant is said to have been killed
by the petitioners by assaulting her by means of lathi and danda.
8. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners
that so far as these petitioners i.e. petitioner nos.1 and 7 to 10
are concerned, they are all family members and there are
general and omnibus allegations of causing death of the
deceased. However, it is pointed out that in the postmortem
report, the cause of death is shown as asphyxia due to hanging.
There is specific assertion in para-10 of the petition that the
husband of the deceased, Hakim Miyan is in custody since
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24780 of 2026(2) dt.30-04-2026
3/3
17.02.2026, who is primarily responsible for welfare of his
wife and the present case is one under Section 103 B.N.S. and
not under Section 80 of the B.N.S. as the death has occurred
after 10 years of marriage, hence presumption clause is not
attracted.
9. Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail.
10 . Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances
of the case and also considering the fact that the allegations
against petitioner nos.1 and 7 to 10 are general and omnibus in
nature, let the above named petitioner nos.1 and 7 to 10, 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.10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to
the satisfaction of the learned lower Court where the case is
pending/successor Court in connection with Manpur P.S. Case
No.95 of 2025, subject to the condition as laid down under
Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C/482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
Trivedi/-
U T
Checking your session…