Patna High Court
Musrat JahanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The petitioner is entitled to pre‑arrest bail, subject to bond and verification of antecedents, under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
The petitioner, Musrat Jahan, owner of an e‑rickshaw, was implicated in a case where 18 litres of illicit liquor were recovered from her vehicle. The name of the petitioner was supplied by the apprehended individual, Mokhatar Alam, and she claims she has no involvement in liquor trade and possesses a clean antecedent. The State opposed her application for pre‑arrest bail under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. The High Court, noting the lack of direct evidence linking her to the contraband and the State’s failure to implement liquor policy, granted pre‑arrest bail subject to a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties and directed the District Court to verify her criminal antecedents. The order is conditioned on compliance with Section 482(2) of the BNSS and will lapse automatically if any other pending case is discovered.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre‑arrest bail in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether the mere recovery of illicit liquor from the petitioner’s e‑rickshaw and identification by an accomplice suffices to deny bail.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- illicit liquor
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- false implication
- e‑rickshaw
- criminal antecedent
- Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8383 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-345 Year-2024 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Kishanganj
======================================================
Musrat Jahan Wife of Akhlak Resident of Village- Sarai, P.S.- Kochadhaman,
District- Kishanganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ram Prawesh Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Suresh Prasad Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 17-02-2026 Heard Mr. Ram Prawesh Kumar, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Suresh Prasad
Singh, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection
with Madya Nisedh P.S. Case No. 345 of 2024 registered for the
offence punishable under Section 30 (a) and 32(3) of the Bihar
Prohibition and Excise Act as amended up-to-date.
3. Allegation is of recovery of 18 litres of illicit liquor
from an E-rickshaw belonging to the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated
in the present case. Petitioner has no concern with the seized
liquor nor he is involved in trade of liquor in any manner. Name
of the petitioner has surfaced in course of investigation because
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8383 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
2/3
petitioner is the owner of E-rickshaw and name of the petitioner
has been disclosed by the apprehended person namely Mokhatar
Alam. Petitioner has clean antecedent. On these grounds,
petitioner seeks to be released on pre-arrest bail.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.
6. Considering the fact that the recovery of 18 litres of
illicit liquor has been made from an E-rickshaw belonging to the
petitioner but the name of the petitioner has been disclosed by
the apprehended person namely Mokhatar Alam and also the
fact that the State has failed to implement liquor policy in its
true spirit,the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released
on pre-arrest bail, in the event of his/her arrest or surrender
before the learned District Court within a period of four weeks
from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned District Court where the case is
pending, in connection with Madya Nisedh P.S. Case No. 345 of
2024, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2)
of the BNSS.
7. The learned District Court is directed to verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner as stated in
paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. If any other case is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8383 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
3/3
pending against the petitioner as what has been stated in
paragraph no. 3, this order will lose its force automatically.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Ashishsingh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.