Patna High Court
Sulekha Khatoon @ Sulekha KhatunversusThe State of BIhar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to a bail bond and surety conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
The petitioners, Sulekha Khatoon and Johara Khatoon, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a murder case (Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.) based on the death of a young man whose body was found hanging from a tree. They argued that the FIR was founded solely on suspicion, there were no eyewitnesses, and they have clean antecedents and are women. The informant alleged a prior panchayati dispute in which the petitioners threatened the victim, but the prosecution could not produce material linking them to the crime. Both the State’s APP and the informant’s counsel could not rebut the claim that the case rests on suspicion alone. The court, considering the petitioners’ clean record and the lack of substantive evidence, granted anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, invoking Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. and imposing standard conditions to ensure cooperation with the investigation.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 482(2) when the accusation is based solely on suspicion and lacks eyewitness evidence.
- Whether the petitioners are likely to abscond or tamper with evidence if released on bail.
- Whether the allegations under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. constitute a cognizable offence warranting denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482
- Section 103
- Section 3
- murder
- suspicion
- clean antecedent
- women
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88407 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-430 Year-2025 Thana- BABUBARHI District- Madhubani
======================================================
1. Sulekha Khatoon @ Sulekha Khatun W/O Hira Nadaf R/O Village - Dudahi,
P.S- Babubarhi, District - Madhubani
2. Johara Khatoon @ Johara Khatun W/O Sobrati Nadaf R/O Village - Dudahi,
P.S- Babubarhi, District - Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of BIhar Advocate General Bihar patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gagan Deo Yadav, Adv.
Mr. Ravi Prakash, Adv.
Ms. Udeshya Kumar Yadav, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rabindra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 12-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned
A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the informant.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1) and
3(5) of the B.N.S..
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and are women
and the informant alleges that on 24.09.2025 at 6 A.M., a dead
body was found hanging from a tree, on alarm, the informant
came to the place of occurrence and found the dead body of her
son whose neck was tied with a Dupatta and mouth tied with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88407 of 2025(4) dt.12-03-2026
2/4
clothes, next alleges that four days prior to the occurrence, a
panchayati regarding a mutual dispute involving the deceased
had taken place, during which several persons including the
petitioners had threatened to kill her son, thus alleges based on
suspicion that her son was killed by the accused persons
including the petitioners by hanging him from the tree.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by
the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the
allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that the entire
allegation hinges around suspicion. It is further submitted that
there is no eyewitness to the occurrence nor the FIR discloses as
to what dispute involving the deceased had taken place for
which a panchayati was held and the deceased was threatened
by the accused persons including the petitioners. It is further
submitted that no doubt the dead body of the deceased was
found hanging on a tree but then whether the petitioners were
involved in the occurrence or not is an aspect of investigation. It
is also submitted that the deceased had made viral a photograph
of the daughter of the petitioner no.1 for which the panchayati
was held but then in the FIR the informant for reasons best
known does not disclose the reason for which the panchayati
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88407 of 2025(4) dt.12-03-2026
3/4
was held. It is also submitted that it absolutely does not stand to
reason that as to why the petitioners who are mother and Aunt
(Mami) of the victim whose photo was made viral on social
media would have indulged in such an occurrence.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners but then the learned APP after
perusing the case diary fairly submits that there is no eyewitness
to the occurrence and no material has transpired during the
course of investigation connecting the petitioners with the
offence except for suspicion. Learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the informant also not in a position to rebut the
submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners that petitioners have been implicated in the instant
case based on suspicion and that there is no eyewitness to the
occurrence. Learned APP submits that in the event if privilege
of anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioners, the petitioners
may abscond, on which, the learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the petitioners submits that petitioners will not abscond rather
will cooperate in the investigation to prove their innocence.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and
also taking into consideration the fact that petitioners are
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88407 of 2025(4) dt.12-03-2026
4/4
persons with clean antecedent and are women, the petitioners
above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a
period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail
on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)
each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction
of learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court
in connection with Babubarhi P.S. Case No.430/2025, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the
B.N.S.S.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.