Patna High Court
Ramita DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner subject to conditions and verification of her antecedent.
Summary
Ramita Devi, the owner of a vehicle, was implicated in a case under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 126 litres of liquor from two motorcycles. She was not arrested at the spot and no liquor was found in her conscious possession; the prosecution’s case rests solely on her ownership of the vehicle used by the accused. The petitioner, a woman with a clean antecedent, sought anticipatory bail, arguing that she was unaware of the misuse of her vehicle. The State opposed the bail, contending that the allegations warranted detention. The Court, considering her clean record, gender, and lack of direct involvement, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs. 500 bond, two sureties, and verification of her antecedent within six weeks, with confirmation contingent on a clean record.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under the circumstances of alleged involvement in an excise offence
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of possession justify granting bail
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise offence
- liquor seizure
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- Section 482
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1264 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-260 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Saran
======================================================
Ramita Devi W/o Anant Ray R/o vill - Ward no. 38, Bada Telpa, P.S.- Nagar,
Distt.- Saran at Chapra. At present Chhota Telpa, P.O.- Sahebganj, P.S.- Town,
Distt.- Saran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Alok Kumar Alok
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 21-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State, Sri Chandra Bhushan Prasad.
2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and
32(3) 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 126 litres of liquor from two
different motorcycles.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1264 of 2026(2) dt.21-01-2026
2/3
vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use
her own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would
create evidence against herself and hence would get implicated,
it is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware
that Ritesh would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged,
who was also apprehended from the spot along with Ravindra.
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 Sadar
Excise P.S. Case No. 260 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 even one case
then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of
seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed her antecedent before this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1264 of 2026(2) dt.21-01-2026
3/3
Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
confirmed, but after verification if 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)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…