Patna High Court
Najini KhatoonversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
In the absence of any material evidence beyond confessional statements, the court held that bail must be granted.
Summary
Najini Khatoon, the petitioner, was arrested in connection with a murder case (Ghorasahan PS Case No.332 of 2024) and has been in custody since 27 August 2024. She sought bail, arguing that she has a clean antecedent and that the allegations in the FIR are false, noting that she was not originally named in the FIR and was implicated only through a co-accused's confessional statement and her own later statement. The prosecution opposed bail, alleging an illicit relationship with the co-accused and emphasizing the seriousness of the offence under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. The court observed that no material evidence other than the confessional statements had been produced and that the weapon had not been recovered. Consequently, the court granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and imposed conditions for cooperation, appearance, and non‑tampering with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a murder case where the only evidence against the accused is a confessional statement.
- Whether the alleged illicit relationship with co‑accused affects the grant of bail.
- Whether the absence of other cogent material justifies continued detention.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 103(1), 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- confessional statement
- clean antecedent
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Sections 103, 3
- Bihar High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77153 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-332 Year-2024 Thana- GHORASAHAN District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Najini Khatoon Wife of Late aftab Alam Resident of Village- Sekhauna, P.S.-
Ghorasahan, District- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Renu Kumari, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 21-01-2026 Heard Mr. Abhishek Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Ms. Renu Kumari, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
27.08.2024 in connection with Ghorasahan P.S. Case No. 332 of
2024, F.I.R. dated 05.08.2024 for the offences punishable under
Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the B.N.S.
3. According to prosecution case, petitioner and other
co-accused persons are alleged to have attacked the informant’s
son by means of knife and killed him.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and the allegation as alleged in
the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77153 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
2/4
committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. Petitioner is not
named in the F.I.R and the name of petitioner has been
transpired during investigation on the basis of confessional
statement of apprehended co-accused person, Rohit Kumar
which is recorded in paragraph 98 of the case diary and
thereafter the self confessional statement of petitioner in
paragraph 81 of case diary in which she has stated that she along
with the co-accused person, namely, Rohit Kumar have killed
the deceased, except the aforesaid, no other cogent material has
come during investigation against the petitioner to suggest the
involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence, even the
arms which was used in the present occurrence, has not been
recovered by the prosecution as yet. He further submits that the
police after investigation, submitted chargesheet against the
petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 27.08.2024 (one
year four months).
5. Learned APP for the State and informant have
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
fairly submits that during investigation, it has come that the
petitioner has illicit relation with the co-accused persons,
namely, Rohit Kumar and Rohit Kumar killed the deceased.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77153 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
3/4
petitioner has clean antecedent and except the confessional
statement of the petitioner no other cogent material has come
during investigation against the petitioner to suggest the
involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence, let the
petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned 14 th
Additional Sessions Judge, East Champaran, Motihari in
connection with Ghorasahan P.S. Case No. 332 of 2024 with the
following conditions:
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed her
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77153 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
4/4
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ranjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…