Patna High Court
Puja KumariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional bail subject to bond, sureties and verification of antecedent.
Summary
Puja Kumari applied for anticipatory bail after a case was registered under Sections 274, 275 and 317(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 80 litres of liquor and a motorcycle from a location behind a hut. She asserted that she has a clean antecedent, is a woman, and was not in possession of the seized items; the vehicle involved belonged to her but she claimed she was unaware that a friend would misuse it. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. The Court, considering the submissions, directed that she be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of her antecedent under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. The order also stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would be revoked, otherwise it would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case involving alleged possession of liquor and a vehicle under the B.N.S. and Excise Act.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle and alleged association with the crime disqualify the petitioner from anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s claim of a clean antecedent is sufficient for granting bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 274, 275, 317(5)
- Cr.P.C. — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 Cr.P.C.
- bail bond
- clean antecedent
- vehicle ownership
- liquor seizure
- Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24420 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-336 Year-2025 Thana- RAGHOPUR District- Vaishali
======================================================
Puja Kumari D/o Santosh Sah Resident of Village- Jhakhara Shekh, P.S.-
Karja, District- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shyameshwar Kumar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Indu Kumari Srivastava
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 20-04-2026 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
Sections 274, 275 and 317(5) of the B.N.S. and 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 allegation is of recovery of 80 litres of liquor and one
motorcycle from a place behind the hut of Santosh Rai.
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 he came to be
implicated based on the fact that she is owner of the seized
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24420 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026
2/3
vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use
her own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would create
evidence against herself and hence, would get implicated. It is
further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that
her friend would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged
who also fled from the spot. It is next submitted that it is not the
case of the prosecution that they saw a woman fleeing from the
place of occurrence.
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
Raghopur (Rustampur) P. S. Case No.336 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24420 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026
3/3
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner 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 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…