Patna High Court

Najara KhatunversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 21 April 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to bond, sureties and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.

Summary

Najara Khatun was implicated in a case under Sections 30(a) and 47 of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 362.880 litres of liquor from a room she owned but had rented to Suresh, who was apprehended at the scene. The petitioner, a woman with a clean criminal record, sought anticipatory bail, arguing that the liquor was not in her conscious possession and that a prudent person would not use her premises for a crime. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of a Rs. 500 bond with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s antecedent before confirming the bail.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the Bihar Excise Act offences.
Whether the petitioner’s lack of conscious possession and clean antecedent justify bail.

Subjects

anticipatory bail
excise offence
liquor seizure
clean antecedent
provisional bail
Bihar Excise Act

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25166 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-400 Year-2025 Thana- EXCISE MAHARAJGANJ District-
                                                          Siwan
                 ======================================================
                 Najara Khatun W/o Manir Khan @ Abdul Manir Khan @ Abdul Muneer
                 Khan R/o Village - Pangawara, P.S - Pachrukhi, District - Siwan

                                                                               ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Ravi Prakash Dwivedi, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Ramesh Chandra, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   21-04-2026                  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 offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and

                   47 of the Bihar 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 362.880 liters of liquor from a room.

                                4. Learned    counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing

                   was recovered from her conscious possession, it is next

                   submitted that no doubt the room belongs to the petitioner and

                   the room from which the liquor is alleged to have been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25166 of 2026(2) dt.21-04-2026
                                            2/3




          recovered was given on rent to Suresh who was also

          apprehended from the spot. It is next submitted that no prudent

          person would use her own premises for committing an

          occurrence and thus would create evidence against herself and

          hence would get implicated, it is also submitted that police in

          mechanical manner investigates and implicates, when petitioner

          is a person with clean antecedent

                       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 Excise

          Maharajganj (Excise) P.S. Case No. 400 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
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25166 of 2026(2) dt.21-04-2026
                                                        3/3




                      seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed her antecedent before this

                      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)
Rishabh/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…