Patna High Court
Mushan Devi @ Muskan DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to bond, sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent, with confirmation contingent on the antecedent being limited to one prior case.
Summary
Mushan Devi, a woman resident of Saidsarai, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly recovering 15 litres of liquor from a public bush. She claimed the allegation was false, made by a chowkidar who had a personal dispute with her husband, and that no liquor was found in her possession at the time of arrest. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, arguing that the recovery occurred on public land and that she had only one prior excise case. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a Rs. 5,000 bond with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify her criminal antecedents, stating that if more than one prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise it would be confirmed immediately.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code in a case under the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise offence
- Section 30
- Bihar Excise Act
- CrPC 482
- false implication
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18775 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-970 Year-2025 Thana- GARKHA District- Saran
======================================================
Mushan Devi @ Muskan Devi W/O Raju Nat R/o Vill.- Saidsarai, P.S -
Garkha, District - Saran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Jha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar No. 2
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 25-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and is
a woman and allegation is of recovery of 15 litres of liquor from
a bush.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from her conscious possession and even the alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
and is accessible to public at large and she came to be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18775 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
2/3
implicated at the instance of Chowkidar with whom her husband
is on an inimical term. It is next submitted that Chowkidar
falsely implicated the petitioner in order to coerce her husband
into submission.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event
of her arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a
period of six weeks from today, be released on Provisional
anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees
Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is
pending/successor court in connection with Garkha P.S. Case No.
970 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
482(2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court
shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one
case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of
seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed her antecedent before this
Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18775 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
3/3
antecedent of one case only, in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.