Patna High Court
Champa DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail may be granted as no offence under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act was made out against the petitioner.
Summary
Champa Devi, a housewife, applied for anticipatory bail after the police seized 34.56 litres of foreign liquor from a truck registered in her name in connection with a case under section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. The prosecution alleged that the truck was used to transport the illicit liquor, while the petitioner contended that she had merely leased the vehicle to Manoj Kumar Yadav under a written agreement dated 1 July 2025 and had no criminal antecedents. Relying on the Full Bench decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar, which held that anticipatory bail can be granted despite the bar in Section 76(2) if no offence is made out, the court examined the facts. The court found that the liquor was not in the petitioner’s conscious possession and that the allegations did not establish a prima facie case against her. Consequently, the court granted anticipatory bail with a set of conditions, including a bail bond, sureties, and compliance with investigation and trial procedures.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act despite the bar under Section 76(2).
- Whether the petitioner’s ownership of the truck, used in the alleged offence, makes her liable for the offence under section 30(a).
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- section 30(a)
- section 76(2)
- seizure of liquor
- vehicle ownership
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21605 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-90 Year-2025 Thana- Mathurapur District- Samastipur
======================================================
Champa Devi W/o Ravi Kant Sharma Resident of Village - Ram Nagar,
Mohalla - Obra, P.S - Obra, District - Aurangabad
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Suman Saurabh, Advocate
: Mr. Ayush Tiwari, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 16-04-2026 Heard Mr. Suman Saurabh and Mr. Ayush Tiwari,
learned counsels for the petitioner and Mr. Bharat Bhushan,
learned APP representing the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending her arrest in
connection with Mathurapur P.S. Case No. 90 of 2025 for the
offence under sections 30(a)of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise
Act lodged on 13.11.2025 by the informant, Md. Rahmat Khan.
3. As per the prosecution story, the Police intercepted
a Truck and there is recovery/seizure of 34.56 liter foreign
liquor. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that she
is a house wife, the Truck is registered in her name, it was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21605 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
2/4
actually handed over to one Manoj Kumar Yadav under an
agreement so that he could ply the vehicle on the road, the
agreement is dated 01.07.2025.
5. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on
the judgment of the Full Bench of Hon’ble Patna High Court in
the case of Ram Vinay Yadav vs. State of Bihar reported in
2019 (2) PLJR 1089 wherein it has been held that an
application for anticipatory bail in a case arising out of Bihar
Excise and Prohibition Act can be maintained, despite the bar
under Section 76(2) of the Act, if on the basis of allegation
made in the FIR, no offence under the said provision is made
out.
6. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that the
lady owns the Truck.
7. Taking into account the submissions of the parties
and the judgment in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav (supra), as
also that she is a lady having no criminal antecedent, nothing
has been recovered from her conscious possession, in that
background, this Court is inclined to extend her the privilege of
anticipatory bail with conditions.
8. Let the petitioner be released on bail in the event of
arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21605 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
3/4
receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Special Judge, Exicise-II, Samastipur in
connection with Mathurapur P.S. Case No. 90 of 2025 subject to
the following conditions:
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official
document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner shall be appearing before the Police
Station as and when required for cooperating in the
investigation;
(iii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date
before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive
dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his
bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iv) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(v) the petitioner shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21605 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
4/4
9. Before parting, this Court would like to put on
record its word of appreciation for Mr. Suman Saurabh and Mr.
Ayush Tiwari, learned counsels for the petitioner for the proper
assistance rendered in the matter.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.