Patna High Court
Mamta SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of her criminal antecedent and compliance with bail bond conditions.
Summary
Mamta Singh was implicated in an excise case for the alleged recovery of 171.36 litres of liquor from a car she owned. She contended that she had no prior criminal antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor, and was unaware that the vehicle would be used for illegal activity. The State opposed her request for anticipatory bail. The High Court, after considering her clean record and lack of direct involvement, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and ordered verification of her antecedent. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional bail would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in the excise case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged lack of possession and clean antecedent justify granting anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- possession
- clean antecedent
- bail bond
- CrPC Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13322 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-109 Year-2025 Thana- EXCISE PATORI District- Samastipur
======================================================
Mamta Singh W/o Sushil Kumar Singh R/o Village - Rulahi, Purani Tola,
Motihari, P.S and District - East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravindra Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman and
inadvertently in the order impugned it is recorded that petitioner
has got antecedent of one case. It is next submitted that
allegation is of recovery of 171.36 liters of liquor from a car.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13322 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
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 also submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that
Manowar would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged
who was also apprehended from the spot along with Md. Anwar.
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 Excise
Patory P.S. Case No. 109 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13322 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
3/3
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed her
antecedent before this 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)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…