Patna High Court
Sumitra DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Sumitra Devi, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of 10 litres of liquor from her residence. She argued she has a clean antecedent, is a woman, and that the liquor was located in a joint family house, making it uncertain that she had knowledge or possession. She further contended that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail. The Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and conditioned the order on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, allowing confirmation if she is found clean and revocation if any antecedent is discovered.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act where alleged possession is in a joint family property.
- Whether the 2018 amendment removing deemed possession affects the bail application.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- possession
- joint family property
- clean antecedent
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482(2)
- Bihar Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2498 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-9 Year-2025 Thana- KARPI District- Arwal
======================================================
Sumitra Devi Son of Rajesh Manjhi R/o Village - Rampur, P.S. - Karpi,
District - Arwal, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Umesh Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Pronoti Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 28-01-2026 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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. 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 10 litres of liquor from the house of
the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from her conscious possession and after 2018
amendment in the Excise Act, the concept of deemed possession
and presumed offender has been done away with. It is next
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2498 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/3
submitted that 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 knowledge of the petitioner and she came to
be implicated at the instance of Chowkidar with whom her
husband is on an inimical term.
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 her arrest or surrender before the learned trial court
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 Karpi
P.S. Case No. 9 of 2025, 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 purposes of
seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed her antecedent before this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2498 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
3/3
Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
confirmed, but after verification if 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)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.