Patna High Court
Dewanti DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to provisional anticipatory bail, subject to bond, sureties, and verification of her antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Dewanti Devi, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for allegedly possessing 9 litres of liquor in a seized motorcycle. She argued that she had a clean antecedent, was a woman, and was not present at the spot of seizure, contending that the vehicle owner should not be automatically implicated. The State opposed the bail, citing the seriousness of the offence. The Court, considering the petitioner's clean record and the procedural defect in the welfare stamp on the vakalatnama, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.500 bond, two sureties, and verification of her antecedent by the trial court. The order stipulated that if any prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 CrPC to a person implicated in an offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether the defect in the welfare stamp on the vakalatnama can be disregarded for the purpose of granting bail.
- Whether ownership of the seized vehicle alone suffices to implicate the owner in the alleged offence.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- vehicle ownership
- liquor seizure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18802 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-320 Year-2025 Thana- GUTHANI District- Siwan
======================================================
Dewanti Devi W/O Ramlal Rajbhar R/O village - Chitvisarav, P. O - Sematar,
P. S - Guthari, District - Siwan
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramadhar Shekhar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umanath Mishra, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 01-04-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
welfare stamp on the Vakalatnama would be filed by tomorrow,
as such, based on the undertaking given by the petitioner, the
defect, as pointed out by the office, is hereby ignored, for the
present.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman and
allegation is of recovery of 9 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18802 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
2/3
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 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 Brajesh Rajbhar would misuse the
vehicle in the manner as alleged who was also apprehended
from the spot. It is submitted that it is not the case of the
prosecution that they saw a woman fleeing from the place of
occurrence.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
7. 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 Guthani P.S. Case No. 320 of 2025, subject
to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18802 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
3/3
Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
8. However, 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 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…