Patna High Court
Reena DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to provisional anticipatory bail, subject to bond, sureties, and verification of her antecedents, under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
Reena Devi sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act for allegedly possessing six litres of liquor at her joint‑family house. She argued that she had no conscious possession, had a clean antecedent, and was falsely implicated by a chowkidar due to personal enmity with her husband. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.500 and two sureties, subject to verification of her criminal antecedents under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. If any antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise it will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. in a case of alleged liquor possession under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act.
- Whether the alleged possession can be attributed to the petitioner given the joint‑family ownership of the premises and lack of conscious possession.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act
- Section 482(2)
- joint family property
- false implication
- liquor possession
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24684 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-21 Year-2026 Thana- SASARAM MUFFSIL District- Rohtas
======================================================
Reena Devi W/O Raj Kumar Bind R/O Village - Banrasia Tola, P.S- Sasaram
Mufassil, Dist- Rohtas
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Babu Nandan Prasad
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 20-04-2026 1. 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment 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 6 litres of liquor from house of
petitioner. It is next submitted that petitioner was not arrested
from the spot as such nothing was recovered from her conscious
possession and the house in question is a joint family property
as such it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was petitioner,
who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the
house was within her knowledge and after amendment in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24684 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026
2/3
Excise Act in the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession
and presumed offender has been done away with and she came
to be implicated at the instance of chowkidar with whom her
husband is on an inimical term. It is also submitted that with a
view to coerce her husband into submission, the chowkidar
falsely implicated her.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of her 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 Sasaram (Muffasil) P.S. Case No.21/2026,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of
the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one
case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24684 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026
3/3
concealed her antecedent before this court, as such, the
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)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…