Patna High Court
SITA DEVIversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
Sita Devi applied for anticipatory bail in a case registered under Section 414 of the IPC and Section 30(a) of the Excise Act, alleging that 6.48 litres of liquor were recovered from her motorcycle. She argued that she was not in possession of the liquor, that she merely owned the vehicle, and that she was unaware of its misuse by another person, Dilip Kumar. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, applying Section 438(2) of the CrPC, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that she furnish bail bonds and two sureties, and that the trial court verify her criminal antecedent. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is found, the bail would be withdrawn; otherwise, it would be confirmed. The application was allowed, subject to these conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in offences punishable under Section 414 IPC and Section 30(a) Excise Act
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence makes the owner liable for anticipatory bail
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedent must be clean for confirmation of anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 414
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- IPC 414
- Excise Act 30(a)
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15645 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-92 Year-2024 Thana- MIRGANJ District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Sita Devi, W/O Dhananjay Ram R/O Vill.- Singha Tola Ahirauli, P.S.-
Hathua, Distt.- Gopalganj, State- Bihar
... ... Petitioner/S
Versus
The State Of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Priya Raj
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar Jha
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 16-03-2026 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 414 of the I.P.C. and 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 6.48 litres of liquor from a
motorcycle.
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.15645 of 2026(2) dt.16-03-2026
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
Dilip 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
Mirganj P. S. Case No.92 of 2024, 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.15645 of 2026(2) dt.16-03-2026
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
Checking your session…