Patna High Court
Sarita RaniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail may be granted despite the petitioner’s ownership of the vehicle, provided she has a clean antecedent and the trial court verifies this, subject to the conditions imposed under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S.
Summary
The petitioner, Sarita Rani, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 for the alleged recovery of 135 litres of liquor from a vehicle she owned. She argued that she had no prior criminal record, was not present at the spot of seizure, and was unaware that the vehicle was misused by another person. The State opposed the bail, contending that ownership of the vehicle linked her to the offence. The court examined the submissions, noted the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of direct involvement, and granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bond and sureties, with a condition that the trial court verify her antecedents. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would be revoked; otherwise, it would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. despite her ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence
- Whether the petitioner’s clean criminal antecedent and lack of direct participation justify the grant of anticipatory bail
- Whether the ownership of the vehicle alone suffices to deny anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 30 Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- excise law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14199 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-212 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Sarita Rani W/o Rajeev Kumar Resident of C-683 3rd Floor Gali No 3, Back
Side Shakarpur, Ganesh Nagar 2, PS- Shankarpur, East Delhi
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sameer Sawarn, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Amitesh Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-03-2026 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 Act, 2016.
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 135 litres of liquor from a Brezza.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from her conscious possession. It is further submitted
that petitioner came to be implicated based on the fact that she is
owner of the seized vehicle. It it next submitted that no prudent
person would use her own vehicle for committing an occurrence
and, thus, would create evidence against herself and, hence,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14199 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
2/3
would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was
completely unaware that Ajay would misuse the vehicle in the
manner as alleged who was also apprehended from the spot
along with Shrawan Kumar.
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 Excise Sadar P.S. Case No. 212 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.14199 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
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
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.