Patna High Court
ParwativersusThe 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
Petitioner Parwati, the owner of a Scorpio from which 402.24 litres of liquor was seized, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. She argued that she was not present at the seizure, had no conscious possession of the liquor, and was unaware of her driver’s alleged misuse of the vehicle. The State opposed the bail, contending that the vehicle’s ownership implicated her in the offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022. The Court noted her clean antecedent and the lack of direct evidence linking her to the contraband, and therefore granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bond and sureties, with a condition that the trial court verify her antecedent. If any prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise it will be confirmed. The order was pronounced by Justice Satyavrat Verma.
Issues considered
- Whether the owner of a vehicle from which liquor is seized can be granted anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. despite the alleged offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of conscious possession justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 Cr.P.C.
- Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- vehicle ownership liability
- clean antecedent
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21194 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-269 Year-2025 Thana- RAMGARH District- Kaimur (Bhabua)
======================================================
Parwati W/o Palakdhari R/o Village - Kusumahi Kala, P.S. - Nandganj, Dist. -
Gazipur(U.P.).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ankita Roy, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar, 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
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman and
allegation is of recovery of 402.24 litres of liquor from a
Scorpio.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21194 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
2/3
and, thus, would create evidence against herself and, hence,
would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was
completely unaware that her driver would misuse the vehicle in
the manner as alleged who also fled from the spot. It is
submitted that it is not the case of the prosecution that they saw
any women fleeing from the place of occurence.
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 Ramgarh P.S. Case No. 269 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.21194 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
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…