Patna High Court
Ruksana Khatoon @ RuksanaversusThe State Of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Ruksana Khatoon, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 18 litres of liquor from an e‑rickshaw she owned. She contended that she was not present at the spot, had no conscious possession of the liquor, and was unaware that her son had used the vehicle for the alleged offence. She applied for anticipatory bail, arguing that her gender and lack of direct involvement warranted relief. The State opposed the bail. The High Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and conditioned on verification of her criminal antecedents; if more than one prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed. The order directs the trial court to verify her antecedent and confirm or set aside the bail accordingly.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s ownership of the vehicle and alleged lack of knowledge absolve her from liability.
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- liquor seizure
- vehicle ownership
- criminal antecedent
- gender considerations
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12837 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-389 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Ruksana Khatoon @ Ruksana W/O Md. Reyaz Ali Vill.- Shahbazpur,
Karhatiya, P.s-Mabbi, Dist.- Darbhanga
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Girish Chandra Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Veena Kumari Jaiswal, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 09-03-2026 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 Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and is a woman and
allegation is of recovery of 18 liters of liquor from an E-
rickshaw.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12837 of 2026(2) dt.09-03-2026
2/3
her own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would
create evidence against herself and hence would get implicated,
it is also submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that
her son, Md. Faiyaz would misuse the vehicle in the manner as
alleged who also apprehended 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.
5,000/- (Rupees Five 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 Excise
Sadar P.S. Case No. 389 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 more
than one case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed her
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12837 of 2026(2) dt.09-03-2026
3/3
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one
case only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…