Patna High Court

Seema DeviversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 10 March 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.

Summary

The petitioner, Seema Devi, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, alleging recovery of 20 litres of liquor from a bush adjacent to her house. She argued she had no conscious possession, a clean antecedent, and was falsely implicated by a watchman to pressure her husband. The State opposed the bail. The Court, noting her clean record, lack of possession, and the possibility of false implication, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.500 bond, two sureties, and compliance with conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. The order directs the trial court to verify her antecedent and confirm the bail if she remains clean.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

Legislation cited

B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Section 30(a)
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
clean antecedent
false implication
bail conditions

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13092 of 2026
                         Arising Out of PS. Case No.-242 Year-2025 Thana- SIMRI District- Buxar
                 ======================================================
                 Seema Devi W/o Munna Paswan Resident of village - Nagpura, P.S.- Simri,
                 Distt.- Buxar
                                                                         ... ... Petitioner/s
                                              Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                  ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Arun Kumar Gupta, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Md. Anzarul Haque Sahara, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   10-03-2026                  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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman and

                   allegation is of recovery of 20 litres of liquor from a bush near

                   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 her conscious possession and even the alleged

                   recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner

                   but then is adjacent to her house and she came to be implicated

                   at the instance of the Chawkidar with whom her husband is in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13092 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
                                            2/3




          an inimical term. It is further submitted that the Chawkidar, in

          order to coerce the husband of the petitioner into submission,

          falsely implicated the petitioner, when petitioner admittedly is a

          person with clean antecedent.

                       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 her arrest or surrender 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 Simri P.S. Case No. 242 of 2025, subject to

          the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the

          Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

                       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 even one case, it

          would be presumed that petitioner had concealed her antecedent

          before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail application in

          that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13092 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
                                                       3/3




                     confirmed but if it is found on verification that petitioner is a

                     person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional

                     anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.


                                                                          (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U     T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…