Patna High Court
Muskan Alam @ Muskan Mudsbin @ Muskan MudassirversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to bail, as continued pre‑trial detention would be punitive and contrary to Article 21.
Summary
The petitioner, Muskan Alam, was arrested in connection with a murder case (PS Madhuban Case No. 260 of 2024) under Sections 302, 304(B) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. He had been in judicial custody since 24 March 2025 and had previously been denied bail. The petitioner argued that his continued detention violated his fundamental right to liberty under Article 21, especially since the trial was still at an early stage with no witnesses examined. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences. The court noted the lengthy pre‑trial detention, the lack of trial progress, and the principle that pre‑trial incarceration should not be punitive, and therefore granted bail on condition of a Rs. 15,000 bond with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted in a case involving murder, culpable homicide not amounting to murder and criminal conspiracy (IPC §§302, 304B, 34) given the seriousness of the offences.
- Whether the petitioner’s right to liberty under Article 21 is violated by continued pre‑trial detention without trial progress.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 304B, 34
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- Indian Penal Code
- Section 302
- Section 304B
- Section 34
- fundamental rights
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15291 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-260 Year-2024 Thana- MADHUBAN District- East Champaran
======================================================
Muskan Alam @ Muskan Mudsbin @ Muskan Mudassir Son of Late
Mahhoom Jillani @ Late Marhoom Jillani Resident of Village- Khairava,
P.S.- Madhuban, District- East Champaran at Motihari
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Karandeep Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 10-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Madhuban P.S. Case No. 260 of 2024, instituted for the offences
under Sections 302, 304(B) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. This is the second attempt of the petitioner for bail.
The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail
which was earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated
14.07.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 35193 of 2025 taking into
consideration the fact that postmortem report corroborates the
allegation levelled in the FIR.
4. In compliance of the order dated 11.03.2026, a
report dated 04.04.2026 with regard to the present stage of trial
has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15291 of 2026(3) dt.10-04-2026
2/3
appears that charge has been framed against the petitioner on
02.04.2026 and no any witness has been examined in this case
out of eight charge-sheeted witnesses. It is further reported that
the trial is likely to be concluded within a period of nine
months.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 24.03.2025
without any rhymes or reason and has got no criminal
antecedent. Learned counsel for the petitioner next submits that
the continued incarceration of the petitioner without conclusion
of trial amounts to a gross violation of the fundamental right
guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which
reiterated by Hon’ble Apex Court in plethora of Judgments.
6. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of
the case, the period of custody undergone by the petitioner and
taking into account the fact that continued detention of the
petitioner would serve no purpose other than punitive pretrial
incarceration, which is antithetical to the spirit of Article 21 of
the Constitution of India, this Court is inclined to grant bail to
the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15291 of 2026(3) dt.10-04-2026
3/3
8. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing
bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court
below/concerned Court in connection with Madhuban P.S. Case
No. 260 of 2024.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Rajorshi/-
U T
Checking your session…