Patna High Court
Sharda DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to conditions and verification of her antecedent.
Summary
Sharda Devi applied for anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for alleged possession of 11 litres of liquor, six litres of which were said to be recovered from her house. She argued that she has a clean antecedent, is a woman, and that the liquor was located in a joint family property, making it uncertain that she had knowledge or control over it. The State opposed the bail, contending that the offence warranted arrest. The Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a modest bond, two sureties, and verification of her criminal antecedent by the trial court. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. in view of the alleged possession of liquor under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether the concept of deemed possession applies to liquor found in a joint family house.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent warrants the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30
- Bihar Prohibition Act
- joint family property
- clean antecedent
- liquor possession
- Cr.P.C. 438
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2006 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-197 Year-2025 Thana- Panchanpur District- Gaya
======================================================
Sharda Devi W/o- Late Durgi Bind Resident of Village- Parariya, P.S-
Panchanpur, District- Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Abhay Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 27-01-2026 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
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is woman and
allegation is of recovery of 11 litres of liquor out of which 6
litres of liquor is alleged to have been recovered from the house
of the petitioner.
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 the house in question is a joint family property, as such, it
cannot be alleged with certainty that it was the petitioner who
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2006 of 2026(2) dt.27-01-2026
2/3
had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house
was within her knowledge and after amendment in the Excise
Act in the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and
presumed offender has been done away with. It is next
submitted that petitioner came to be implicated based on the
secret information which is the easiest way to implicate
someone without holding a proper investigation of the case.
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 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
Panchanpur P.S. Case No. 197 of 2025, subject to the conditions
as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./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 if
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2006 of 2026(2) dt.27-01-2026
3/3
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…