Patna High Court
Pintu MusharversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to conditions and verification of his criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Pintu Mushar, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for alleged recovery of 28 litres of liquor from a paddy field adjacent to his house. He argued that he was not arrested at the spot, no liquor was found in his possession, and the information was based merely on the chawkidar’s suspicion. The petitioner, who has four prior criminal cases (three under the Excise Act), sought anticipatory bail, which the State opposed. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.20,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The order further directed that the trial court verify the petitioner’s antecedent; if more than four cases are found, the bail will not be confirmed, otherwise it will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of possession of the alleged liquor and the circumstances of the FIR justify granting bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedent (four prior cases) affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- Section 30
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- criminal antecedent
- Section 438 CrPC
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91201 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-176 Year-2025 Thana- ITARHI District- Buxar
======================================================
Pintu Mushar S/O Masodi Mushar @ Mosdi Mushar Resident of village -
Basudhar, P.S - Itarhi, District- Buxar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar Pradhan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anil Prasad Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of four cases out of which three cases
are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 28
litres of liquor from a paddy field behind the house of the
petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and even the alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
but then is adjacent to his house, as such, he came to be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91201 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
2/3
implicated based on suspicion at the instance of the Chawkidar
but then it is submitted that if the Chawkidar was aware of the
involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence then why he did
not inform the police prior to the institution of the instant FIR
which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is
further submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case
relating to excise the police start implicating mechanically either
at the instance of the Chawkidar, local person, secret
information or confessional statement without holding a proper
investigation of the case.
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, let the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his 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.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty 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
Itarhi P.S. Case No. 176 of 2025, subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91201 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
3/3
BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial
court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if
it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than four cases,
it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner has antecedent of only four cases in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…