Patna High Court

BHAGWATI DEVIversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR

Decided: 15 January 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The court ordered provisional anticipatory bail for the petitioner, subject to verification of a clean antecedent and compliance with the stipulated conditions.

Summary

Bhagwati Devi, the wife of Pankaj Yadav, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 3.75 litres of liquor from a motorcycle she owned. She was not present at the spot of seizure and did not have the liquor in her conscious possession; the vehicle’s ownership linked her to the offence. The petitioner, represented by Mr. Rahul Singh, sought anticipatory bail, emphasizing her clean antecedent and gender, and argued that she was unaware of any misuse of her vehicle. The State, through Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, opposed the bail. Justice Satyavrat Verma granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and ordered the trial court to verify her antecedents, confirming bail only if she is found to have a clean record.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Whether ownership of the vehicle, without possession of the contraband, suffices to justify denial of anticipatory bail

Legislation cited

B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Section 30(a)
Section 482(2)
vehicle ownership
clean antecedent
liquor seizure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.249 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-199 Year-2025 Thana- PASRAHA District- Khagaria
                 ======================================================
                 BHAGWATI DEVI WIFE OF PANKAJ YADAV R/O VILLAGE-
                 SONDIHA, P.S.- PASRAHA, DISTRICT- KHAGARIA

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 THE STATE OF BIHAR

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Rahul Singh
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   15-01-2026                  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 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 3.75 litres of liquor from a

                   motorcycle. It is next submitted 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

                   she is owner of the seized vehicle. 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.249 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
                                            2/3




          hence would get implicated. It is also submitted that the

          petitioner was completely unaware that Sanni would misuse the

          vehicle in the manner as alleged who was also apprehended

          from the spot.

                       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 before the learned Court below

          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 Pasraha

          P.S. Case No.199/2025, 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

          concealed her antecedent before this court, as such, the

          provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.249 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
                                                         3/3




                       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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…