Patna High Court
Chimaladari Samyuktha @ Ch. SamyukthaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of her antecedents and compliance with the stipulated conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Chimaladari Samyuktha, sought anticipatory bail after a seizure of 10.5 litres of liquor from an ambulance vehicle allegedly owned by her. She argued that she had no prior criminal record, was not present at the spot of seizure, and had no conscious possession of the liquor; the vehicle was misused by another individual. The State opposed the bail, citing offences under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. The Court, noting the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of direct involvement, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs. 500 bond, two sureties, and verification of her criminal record by the trial court. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would be revoked, otherwise it would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail for alleged offences under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence suffices to implicate the petitioner.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act (BNSS) — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- liquor seizure
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22067 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-215 Year-2026 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Kishanganj
======================================================
Chimaladari Samyuktha @ Ch. Samyuktha D/o Ch. Venkatesh Resident of -
29-480 Keshav Nagar, Neredmet Malkajgiri, P.S - Neredmet, District -
Medchal, M- Giri (Telangana)
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bhola Prasad
For the Opposite Party/s : Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 07-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and
32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 10.5 liters of liquor from an ambulance vehicle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing
was recovered from his conscious possession and he came to be
implicated based on the fact that he is owner of the seized
vehicle, it is next submitted that no prudent person would use
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22067 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
2/3
his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would
create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated.
It is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware
that Kandhropur Venketesh would misuse the vehicle in the
manner as alleged who was also apprehended from the spot
along with Kamshani Satish.
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 his 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 Madhya Nisedh P.S. Case No. 215 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22067 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
3/3
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
verification if it is found that petitioner has clean antecedent, in
that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-
U T
Checking your session…