Patna High Court
Sita DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional bail subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
The petitioner, Sita Devi, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case registered under Section 30(A) of the Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 18 litres of liquor from her residence. She argued that she has a clean antecedent, is a woman, and that the liquor was found in a joint family house, making it uncertain that she had possession or knowledge of it. The petition also highlighted that the amendment to the Excise Act in 2018 abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender, and that the FIR does not disclose the informant’s name. The State opposed the bail, but the Court considered the submissions and directed that, upon surrender or arrest within six weeks, the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to Section 438(2) conditions. The Court further ordered verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, stating that any undisclosed prior case would lead to revocation of the provisional bail, while a clean record would confirm it.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner under Section 438 CrPC in a case under Section 30(A) of the Excise Act?
- Does the amendment to the Excise Act, 2018, eliminating deemed possession affect the petitioner’s liability?
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(A)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- Section 30(A)
- joint family property
- clean antecedent
- deemed possession
- presumed offender
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10088 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-488 Year-2025 Thana- KAKO District- Jehanabad
======================================================
Sita Devi Wife of Ramashish Manjhi Resident of Village- Titaibigha, P.S.-
Kako, Dist.- Jehanabad
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Amrendra Kumar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shyam Bihari Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 16-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of her
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(A) of the Excise Act.
3. The 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 18 litres of liquor from house of
the petitioner.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from her conscious possession and even the house in
question is a joint family property and thus, it cannot be alleged
with certainty that it was the petitioner, who had kept the liquor
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10088 of 2026(3) dt.16-03-2026
2/3
in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within her
knowledge and after Amendment in the Excise Act, 2018, the
concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been
done away with and she came to be implicated at the instance of
local person, but the name of the person, who disclosed the
name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the F.I.R., which casts
an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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 Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on her furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum 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
Kako P. S. Case No.488 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid
down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10088 of 2026(3) dt.16-03-2026
3/3
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 obtaining
anticipatory bail had concealed her antecedent before this Court,
in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall
not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…