Patna High Court
Chhoti KumariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail may be granted notwithstanding Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act where the accused has no possession of the contraband, a clean antecedent, and the accusation is based solely on a co‑accused’s confession.
Summary
Chhoti Kumari was implicated in a case involving the recovery of 20 litres of country-made liquor and charged under several IPC sections and the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. She contended that the liquor was not found in her possession and that the case against her rested solely on the confessional statement of a co‑accused, Kundan Kumar. The petitioner, who has a clean antecedent, sought anticipatory bail, while the State opposed it invoking Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act which bars pre‑arrest bail. Relying on the Full Bench decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar and noting the lack of direct evidence against her, the court granted anticipatory bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and specific conditions. The order directs the lower court to release the petitioner if arrested within thirty days, subject to compliance with the stipulated conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to an accused under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act despite Section 76(2) which disallows pre‑arrest bail.
- Whether the absence of recovered liquor from the petitioner’s conscious possession and her clean antecedent justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether reliance on a co‑accused’s confessional statement is sufficient ground to accuse the petitioner.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 337, 338, 341, 353, 427, 504
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- false implication
- confessional statement
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
- Section 76(2)
- IPC offences
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27553 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-53 Year-2023 Thana- BAHADURPUR District- Patna
======================================================
Chhoti Kumari D/o- Chandeshwar Manjhi Resident of Bahadurpur
Mushahari, P.s- Bahadurpur, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binay Kumar Singh, Advocate
: Mr. Kumar Kaushlendra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 23-04-2026 Heard Mr. Binay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending her arrest in
connection with Bahadurpur P.S. Case No. 53 of 2023, F.I.R
dated 10.02.2023 registered for the offences punishable under
Section 341, 323, 353, 504, 427, 337, 338 of the Indian Penal
Code and 30(a), 32(2)(3), 36, 41(1)(11) of Bihar Prohibition and
Excise Act.
3. Recovery is of 20 liters of country made liquor.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has clean antecedent and she has falsely been
implicated in the present case. He further submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27553 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
2/4
allegation as alleged in the F.I.R is false and fabricated. He
further submits that it appears from the F.I.R that nothing has
been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner
rather the recovery has been made from the place of occurrence
and petitioner has been made accused in this case merely on the
basis of confessional statement of apprehended co-accused
person, namely, Kundan Kumar. He next submits that the
petitioner has no concern at all with the alleged recovery of
liquor or the co-accused person and similarly situated co-
accused persons, namely, Reeta Devi and Kabir Kumar @ Kabir
Manjhi @ Raj Kiran have been granted the privilege of
anticipatory bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide
order dated 10.04.2024 in Cr. Misc. No. 20416 of 2024. No
case, whatsoever, would be made out against the petitioner
under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the
petitioner referring the provision contained in Section 76(2) of
the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and submitted that the pre-
arrest bail would not be maintainable.
6. This court is aware of the decision of the Full
Bench in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav vs. State of Bihar
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27553 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
3/4
reported in 2019(2) P.L.J.R. 1089. Having regard to the law laid
down in the aforesaid judgment and the submission advanced on
behalf of the parties, this Court, for the limited purpose of grant
of anticipatory bail, is inclined to accept the submission of
counsel for the petitioner.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts, nothing has
been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner and
the petitioner has clean antecedent and she has been made
accused in this case merely on the basis of confessional
statement of apprehended co-accused person and similarly
situated co-accused persons have been granted the privilege of
anticipatory bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court, let the
petitioner, above named, in the event of her arrest or surrender
before the court below within a period of thirty days from the
date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive
Special Court of Excise, Patna City in connection with
Bahadurpur P.S. Case No. 53 of 2023, subject to the conditions
as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita and with other following conditions:-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27553 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
4/4
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed her
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…