Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Shanti DeviversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED

Holding

Anticipatory bail is refused as the petitioner is the owner of the seized vehicle.

Summary

Shanti Devi, the owner of a vehicle, was implicated in a case where 304 litres of codeine‑mixed cough syrup was seized from that vehicle, alleged to be an offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. She applied for anticipatory bail, arguing that no incriminating material was found in her personal possession, she has a clean antecedent and is being accused merely on suspicion. The State opposed the bail application. The High Court considered that ownership of the seized vehicle linked her to the offence and therefore refused the anticipatory bail. The order was pronounced by Justice Prabhat Kumar Singh, denying the petition for bail.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the owner of a vehicle from which prohibited liquor was seized under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
  • Whether ownership of the seized vehicle establishes sufficient connection to the offence to deny anticipatory bail

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
  • Section 30(a)
  • codeine cough syrup
  • vehicle seizure
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20016 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-540 Year-2022 Thana- JOKIHAT District- Araria
                 ======================================================
                 Shanti Devi Wife of Bindeshwar Hembram @ Bindewari Hembram Resident
                 of Village- Mimgachhi BMP, Itwa, P.S.- Singaul, District- Begusarai (Bihar)
                 and presently residing at village- Budhiagola, Dhangatta, P.S.- Sarasi,
                 District- Purnia (Bihar)

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Kumar Ravish, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Shailendra Kumar, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   08-04-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

                                2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in Jokihat (Mahalgaon)

                   P. S. Case No. 540 of 2022 registered for the offence punishable

                   under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

                                3. As per prosecution case, 304 liters codeine mixed

                   cough syrup was recovered from the seized vehicle of which

                   this petitioner is registered owner.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no

                   incriminating material has been recovered from conscious

                   possession of the petitioner. Petitioner has got no concern with

                   the alleged recovery and she has been made accused in this case

                   only on suspicion. Petitioner claims clean antecedent.

                                5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20016 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
                                                          2/2




                        bail of the petitioner.

                                     6. Considering the fact that petitioner is owner of the

                        seized vehicle, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is

                        refused.



                                              (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-

U         T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.