Patna High Court
Asha DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to bond, sureties and verification of her antecedent.
Summary
Asha Devi, the wife of Madho Saw, applied for anticipatory bail after the police seized 32 litres of liquor from a motorcycle she owned, alleging a violation of Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. She argued that she was not present at the spot, had no conscious possession of the liquor, and was unaware that the vehicle would be used for the alleged offence. The State opposed the bail, contending that the seizure implicated her. The High Court, considering her clean antecedent and the circumstances, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a cash bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and subject to verification of her criminal record. 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 can be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Whether the ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence suffices to implicate the petitioner
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- vehicle ownership
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20574 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-789 Year-2025 Thana- BEUR District- Patna
======================================================
Asha Devi Wife of Madho Saw @ Madhav Saw R/o Chitkohra, P.S.-
Gardanibagh, Dist.- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Jiban Pd Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Parmanand Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and 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 32 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.
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 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,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20574 of 2026(2) dt.31-03-2026
2/3
would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was
completely unaware that Gautam Kumar would misuse the
vehicle in the manner as alleged who was also apprehended
from the spot along with Pintu Kumar and Aakash Kumar. It is
submitted that it is not the case of the prosecution that they saw
any female 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, 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 Beur P.S. Case No. 789 of 2025, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the
Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20574 of 2026(2) dt.31-03-2026
3/3
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…