Patna High Court

Sultana ParweenversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 4 February 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of her criminal antecedent.

Summary

The petitioner, Sultana Parween, sought anticipatory bail after learning that she might be arrested in a case registered under Sections 272 and 273 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of nine litres of liquor from a scooty she owned. She argued that she had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor, and was unaware that another person, Gareeb Sahni, had misused her vehicle. The State opposed the bail, contending that the allegations warranted arrest. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and that the trial court verify her antecedent within six weeks. If any prior case is discovered, the bail would be revoked; otherwise, it would be confirmed.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in the pending case under Sections 272, 273 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.

Legislation cited

Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 272, 273
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
bail conditions
criminal antecedent
vehicle ownership
liquor seizure
Section 272
Section 273
Bihar Excise Act
Criminal Procedure Code

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6558 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-41 Year-2024 Thana- ARER District- Madhubani
                 ======================================================
                 Sultana Parween D/o Maksud Alam R/o Village - Bichhiaon, P.S - Sandesh,
                 District - Bhojpur

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Ravi Prakash
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Md. Nazir Ansari
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   04-02-2026               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 Sections 272 and

                   273 of BNS and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman and

                   allegation is of recovery of 9 litres of liquor from a Scooty.

                             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 she came to be

                   implicated based on the fact that she is owner of the seized

                   vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use

                   her own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6558 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
                                            2/3




          create evidence against herself and hence would get implicated,

          it is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware

          that Gareeb Sahni would misuse the vehicle in the manner as

          alleged, who was also apprehneded from the spot.

                   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.

          500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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 Arer P.S.

          Case No. 41 of 2024, 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 even 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 is a
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6558 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
                                                          3/3




                        person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional

                        anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…