Patna High Court
Daulat DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail was granted subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Daulat Devi, owner of a pickup vehicle, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act after 212.4 litres of liquor were recovered from her vehicle. She was not present at the scene and the driver fled, leading her to claim she had no knowledge of the offence. She sought anticipatory bail, arguing her clean antecedent and that ownership alone should not make her culpable. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a modest bond, two sureties, and verification of her criminal antecedent, with the order to be confirmed if she is found to have a clean record.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the owner of a vehicle from which liquor was seized under the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle alone establishes sufficient grounds for arrest and denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- liquor seizure
- vehicle ownership
- Section 482
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15930 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-12 Year-2026 Thana- GUTHANI District- Siwan
======================================================
Daulat Devi W/o Dukha Sahani R/o Village - Ratwara Chati Kothiya, Sherpur
Urf Narayanpur Anant, P.S - Ahiyapur, District - Muzaffarpur, State - Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Hemant Ray
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Sucheta Yadav
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 06-04-2026 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
allegation is of recovery of 212.4 liters of liquor from a pick up
vehicle.
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
vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15930 of 2026(3) dt.06-04-2026
2/3
her own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would
create evidence against herself and hence would get implicated
and at the same time shall bring disrepute to her business, it is
also submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that her
driver would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged who
also fled from the spot. It is next submitted that it is not the case
of the prosecution that they saw a woman fleeing from the place
of occurrence.
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 Guthani
P.S. Case No. 12 of 2026 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15930 of 2026(3) dt.06-04-2026
3/3
then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the 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…