Patna High Court

Kalawati DeviversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 31 March 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The court held that the petitioner is entitled to provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of her antecedent, as she is not in direct possession of the seized liquor.

Summary

Kalawati Devi, the owner of a motorcycle from which 6.375 litres of liquor was seized, sought anticipatory bail after fearing arrest under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Excise Act. She argued that she had no knowledge of the liquor being in her vehicle and that her son, who was apprehended at the scene, had misused the vehicle without her consent. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offence. The High Court, considering her clean antecedent and the lack of direct possession, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs. 500 bond, two sureties, and verification of her criminal record within six weeks. The order is conditional on Section 482(2) of the CrPC and may be revoked if any antecedent is discovered.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the CrPC in a case of alleged liquor possession under the Bihar Excise Act.
Whether the ownership of the vehicle used by the son implicates the petitioner in the offence.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Bihar Excise Act
Section 30(a)
Section 32(3)
Section 482 CrPC
liquor seizure
vehicle ownership
criminal antecedent

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20261 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-141 Year-2026 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Gaya
                 ======================================================
                 Kalawati Devi W/o- Rajesh Sao @ Rajesh Saw Village- Nain Sagar PS-
                 Barachatti Dist- Gaya

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :         Mr.Vijay Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :         Mr.Shailendra Kumar
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   31-03-2026               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 Sections 30(a) and

                   32(3) of the Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.     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 6.375 litres of liquor from a

                   motorcycle.

                             4.     Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   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.20261 of 2026(2) dt.31-03-2026
                                            2/3




          her own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would

          create evidence against herself and hence would get implicated,

          it is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware

          that her son, Mukesh, would misuse the vehicle in the manner as

          alleged, who was also apprehended from the spot.

                   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 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 Gaya Excise P.S. Case No. 141 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

          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
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20261 of 2026(2) dt.31-03-2026
                                                          3/3




                        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)
Sumit/-

U         T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…