Jharkhand High Court
B.A./9296/2026 of MAFIDA BIWI Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 6 October 2026
) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 9296 of 2026 Mafida Biwi, aged about 53 years, Wife of Mahmud Mian, Resident of Village-Kolhariya, P.O. & P.S.-Bengabad, District-Giridih … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party ---
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
( 2026:JHHC:29915 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 9296 of 2026
Mafida Biwi, aged about 53 years, Wife of Mahmud Mian, Resident of Village-Kolhariya, P.O. & P.S.-Bengabad, District-Giridih
… … Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY ---
02/06.10.2026
Learned counsel for the petitioner is present.
2. Learned counsel for the Opp. Party-State Mr. Satish Prasad is also present.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 29.06.2026 in connection with Bengabad P.S. Case No. 121 of 2023, registered under Section 302/34 of I.P.C., now pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the mother-in-law of the deceased and co-accused persons have been acquitted in a separate trial. He submits that the marriage had taken ten years back and the case is for alleged offence under Section 302/34 of I.P.C. The petitioner is in custody since 29.06.2026.
5. Learned counsel for the opposite party- State has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that in the impugned order itself, it has been mentioned that people in the neighbor have stated that on 29.05.2023, the deceased was assaulted and quarrel was going on and she was crying in the night and on the next day, she was found dead at home.
6. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and considering the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State which is reflected from the impugned order itself and the deceased died in her matrimonial home under unnatural conditions, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected.
( 2026:JHHC:29915 )
2
7. At this, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that some observation be made so that the trial is concluded expeditiously.
8. The State is directed to ensure that the witnesses are promptly produced before the Court as and when, they are called upon.
9. Learned counsel for the state is directed to communicate this order to the Superintendent of Police of the concerned district and the Director Prosecution, to ensure compliance.
10. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through “FAX/email”.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:06.10.2026 Nandini Date of Uploading: