Patna High Court
Kavita KumariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was granted because ownership of the vehicle without conscious possession and a clean antecedent does not justify denial of bail, subject to verification of antecedents.
Summary
Kavita Kumari applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 11.25 litres of liquor from a motorcycle she owned. She asserted that she has a clean antecedent, was not in conscious possession of the liquor, and was unaware that a friend misused her vehicle. The State opposed the bail, arguing that the vehicle was used in the alleged offence. The Court examined the submissions, noting that ownership of the vehicle alone does not prove participation and that there was no evidence of her fleeing the scene. It directed that she be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of her antecedent. The application was allowed, with the proviso that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail may be withdrawn.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 CrPC when the accused is not in conscious possession of the contraband.
- Whether ownership of a vehicle used in the alleged offence is sufficient to deny anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 30
- Section 438
- clean antecedent
- vehicle ownership
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26574 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-119 Year-2018 Thana- MARANCHI District- Patna
======================================================
Kavita Kumari Wife of Rohit Sharma Resident of Village - Govindpur, P.S. -
Suryagarha, District - Lakhisarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Prem Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Fahimuddin
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 22-04-2026 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
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 11.25 litres of liquor from a
motorcycle.
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 she came to be
implicated based on the fact that she is owner of the seized
motorcycle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26574 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
2/3
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 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
Maranchi P. S. Case No.119 of 2018, 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
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26574 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
3/3
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…