Chandani DeviversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13555 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-963 Year-2025 Thana- EXCISE KAHALGAON District-
                                                        Bhagalpur
                 ======================================================
                 Chandani Devi Wife of Raj Kumar Mandal R/o Vill.- Rani Talab Zero Mile,
                 P.S.- Sabour, Dist.- Bhagalpur

                                                                               ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr.Rajive Ranjan Singh
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Ms.Anita Kumari
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   10-03-2026                  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 27 litres of liquor from an auto.

                                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 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.13555 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
                                            2/3




          her own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would create

          evidence against herself and hence, would get implicated. It is

          further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that

          Saurabh Kumar would misuse the vehicle in the manner as

          alleged as he was also apprehended at the spot.

                       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

          Excise (Kahalgaon) P. S. Case No.963 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

          the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is

          found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, then it
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13555 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
                                                           3/3




                         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