Patna High Court
Durgavati DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that the petitioners are entitled to provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of their antecedents under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
The petitioners, Durgavati Devi and Ankit Kumar Yadav, were charged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly possessing 28.8 litres of liquor recovered from a scooty. They argued they have clean antecedents, were not apprehended at the scene, and that ownership of the vehicle does not imply participation in the offence. The State opposed their bail, contending the prosecution’s evidence was sufficient. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties each, subject to verification of their criminal antecedents. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, with the proviso that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the prosecution’s evidence justifies denial of bail.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle implicates the petitioner in the offence.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- clean antecedent
- vehicle ownership
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22260 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-211 Year-2025 Thana- RASULPUR District- Saran
======================================================
1. Durgavati Devi Wife of Sukhdev Yadav R/o Village - Khanpur, P.S. -
Manjhi, Dist. - Saran.
2. Ankit Kumar Yadav @ Ankit Kumar Son of Sukhdev Yadav R/o Village -
Khanpur, P.S. - Manjhi, Dist. - Saran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Binod Kumar Sinha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Arun Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in a case registered for the
offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise
Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and petitioner no.
1 is a woman and allegation is of recovery of 28.8 liters of
liquor from a scooty.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners were not apprehended from the spot as such nothing
was recovered from their conscious possession, it is next
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22260 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
2/3
submitted that petitioner no. 1 came to be implicated based on
the fact that she is owner of the seized scooty, 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 would get implicated. It is also
submitted that it is not the case of the prosecution that they saw
a woman fleeing from the place of occurrence, it is also
submitted that petitioner no. 2 came to be implicated at the
instance of local person but then the name of the person who
disclosed the name of petitioner no. 2 is not disclosed in the FIR
which casts as aspersion on the case of the prosecution when
petitioner no. 2 has not been implicated based on secret
information and admittedly he is a person with clean antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the bail
application of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, are
directed to be released on provisional anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) each
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 Rasulpur P.S. Case No. 211 of 2025
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22260 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
3/3
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 petitioners and
in the event if it is found that petitioners have antecedent of
even one case then it would be presumed that petitioners, for the
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed their
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
verification if it is found that petitioners have clean antecedent,
in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-
U T
Checking your session…