Patna High Court
Kalika Devi @ Kukila DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that provisional anticipatory bail may be granted where the petitioner’s ownership of the vehicle does not conclusively establish possession of the contraband, subject to verification of her criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Kalika Devi, sought anticipatory bail after a vehicle she owned was seized containing 1.5 litres of liquor, alleged to be a violation of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. She argued that she had no knowledge of the liquor being in the vehicle, that the seizure was made from a friend’s possession, and that she had a clean criminal record. The State opposed the bail, contending that the vehicle’s ownership linked her to the offence. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a modest bond and sureties, subject to verification of her antecedents by the trial court. The order stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would be revoked, otherwise it would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- What is the applicability of anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in a case of alleged possession of liquor in a vehicle owned by the accused?
- Whether ownership of the vehicle, without actual possession of the liquor, suffices to justify denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Sale (BNSS) — s. 482(2)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30, 30(a), 37(B)(C)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- liquor seizure
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- Section 482(2) BNSS
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22261 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-124 Year-2021 Thana- SAHAJITPUR District- Saran
======================================================
Kalika Devi @ Kukila Devi W/o Birju Deshmukh R/o Village - Mirjapur, P.S
- Sonpur, District - Saran at Chapra
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Avinash Kumar Pandey
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Chandrabhushan Prasad,
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-04-2026 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 offences punishable under Sections 30, 30(a),
37(B)(C) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
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 1.5 liters of liquor from a Sumo
vehicle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was not apprehended 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
vehicle, it is next submitted that no prudent person would use
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22261 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
2/3
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
next submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that his
friend Bibhishan would misuse the vehicle in the manner as
alleged who was also apprehended from the spot.
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 Sahajitpur P.S. Case No. 124 of 2021 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.22261 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
3/3
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed her
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…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.