Patna High Court
Pushpa DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail may be granted in the present circumstances, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
Pushpa Devi, the wife of a deceased man, applied for anticipatory bail after a case was registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act alleging that 78.300 litres of liquor were recovered from an auto she owned. She was not arrested at the spot and the liquor was not found in her personal possession; the allegation is that she was implicated merely as the owner of the vehicle. The petitioner’s counsel highlighted her clean antecedent, her status as a woman, and that she was unaware of any misuse of the auto by a person named Suraj who was apprehended at the scene. The State opposed the bail, but the court considered that a prudent person would not use her own vehicle to commit the offence and that the lack of direct possession weakened the prosecution’s case. Applying Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C., the court directed that she be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of her antecedent. The court ordered that if any prior case is found, the bail would be withdrawn; otherwise, the provisional bail would be confirmed. The application for anticipatory bail was therefore allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 Cr.P.C. to a person accused under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act when she is merely the owner of the vehicle from which liquor was seized
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of direct possession justify granting anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 30
- Section 438
- clean antecedent
- liquor seizure
- gender considerations
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2157 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-330 Year-2025 Thana- PURNEA SADAR District- Purnia
======================================================
Pushpa Devi Wife of Late Kishor Paswan Resident of Brajesh Nagar, P.S.- K.
Hat, District- Purnea
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Md Fazle Karim
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Meena Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 27-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of her
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The 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 78.300 litres of liquor from an
auto.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
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 auto.
It is next submitted that no prudent person would use her own
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2157 of 2026(2) dt.27-01-2026
2/3
vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would create evidence
against herself and hence, would get implicated. It is further
submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that Suraj
would misuse the auto in the manner as alleged as he was also
apprehended at the spot.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, in the
event of her arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on her furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum 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
Sadar P. S. Case No.330 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid
down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2157 of 2026(2) dt.27-01-2026
3/3
would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining
anticipatory bail had concealed her antecedent before this Court,
in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall
not be confirmed, but if on verification, 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)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…