Patna High Court
Nipoo KumariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
Nipoo Kumari applied for anticipatory bail in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act where 27 litres of liquor were allegedly recovered from a motorcycle she owned. She asserted that she has a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of seizure, and was unaware that the vehicle would be misused. The State opposed the bail, arguing the vehicle’s ownership linked her to the offence. The Court examined the submissions, noted the lack of direct possession and her clean record, and applied Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. to grant provisional anticipatory bail with a bond of Rs.500 and two sureties. The order is subject to verification of her antecedent; if any prior case is found, the bail may be withdrawn, otherwise it will be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the accused is not in direct possession of the contraband.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence suffices to deny anticipatory bail.
- What conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. are applicable to the grant of anticipatory bail in this case.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Section 438
- clean antecedent
- vehicle ownership
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2337 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-238 Year-2025 Thana- NAUTAN District- Siwan
======================================================
Nipoo Kumari D/O Prayag Prasad C/O Rabindra Singh, R/O Vill.- Tadwa
Parasiya, P.S.- Nautan, Dist.- Siwan
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Veena Kumari Jaiswal
======================================================
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 is a woman and allegation is of recovery of 27 litres of
liquor from a motorcycle.
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 he is owner of the seized
motorcycle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2337 of 2026(2) dt.27-01-2026
2/3
use her own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would
create evidence against himself and hence, would get
implicated. It is further submitted that petitioner was completely
unaware that Golu would misuse the vehicle in the manner as
alleged as he was also apprehended at the spot along with
Prayag and Sandeep.
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
Nautan P. S. Case No.238 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2337 of 2026(2) dt.27-01-2026
3/3
found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, then it
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…