IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42142 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-283 Year-2026 Thana- MOTIHARI MUFASIL District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1. Sheonath Mukhiya S/o Jhunjhun Mukhiya R/o Village - Tharghatwa, P.S - Mufassil, District - East Champaran 2. Phoolmati Devi W/o Jhunjhun Mukhiya R/o Village - Tharghatwa, P.S - Mufassil, District - East Champaran 3. Subhash Mukhiya S/o Jhunjhun Mukhiya R/o Village - Tharghatwa, P.S - Mufassil, District - East Champaran 4. Indrajeet Mukhiya @ Amarjeet Mukhiya S/o Late Mahendra Mukhiya R/o Village - Tharghatwa, P.S - Mufassil, District - East Champaran 5. Chakaloo Mukhiya S/o Late Mahendra Mukhiya R/o Village - Tharghatwa, P.S - Mufassil, District - East Champaran 6. Jalandhar Mukhiya S/o Late Mahendra Mukhiya R/o Village - Tharghatwa, P.S - Mufassil, District - East Champaran 7. Kiran Devi W/o Late Jairam Mukhiya R/o Village - Tharghatwa, P.S - Mufassil, 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 : Mr.Jagdhar Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 2 08-07-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the BNS, 2023. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits petitioners are person with clean antecedent and petitioner No. 2 and 7 are Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42142 of 2026(2) dt.08-07-2026 2/3 women and the informant alleges that on 06.05.2026 at about 06:00 PM, she received an information that her son Jairam, who was residing at his in-laws house with his wife, was murdered, accordingly on receiving the information, she came to the place of occurrence and found the dead body of his son lying on the ground thus based on suspicion alleges that accused persons including the petitioners murdered her son. 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 informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence and the entire allegation hinges around suspicion, it is also submitted that petitioner no. 4, 5 and 6 are cousin brother of the wife of the deceased and they reside separately, but in a mechanically manner they also came to be implicated, it is further submitted that petitioner no. 7 is wife of the deceased, it is next submitted that it absolutely does not stand to reason that as to why the family members of the wife of the deceased would have killed the deceased making petitioner No. 7 a widow. 5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposed the anticipatory bail application and submits what is not in dispute rather stands admitted is that son of the informant died at his matrimonial house and from perusal of the order impugned, it would manifest that the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42142 of 2026(2) dt.08-07-2026 3/3 same records the cause of death as asphyxia on account of strangulation, it is next submitted that since deceased died on account of strangulation that amply points to the fact about the involvement of the accused persons in the occurrence, it is further submitted investigation is continuing and if during the course of investigation no material is collected connecting the petitioners with the offence, in that event, final form would be submitted, but then the case requires to be investigated, since cause of death is strangulation. 6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration and submissions made by the learned A.P.P. for the State, this Court is not to inclined to extent the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 7. This application stands rejected. Nitesh/- (Satyavrat Verma, J) U T