Patna High Court
Meena DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions and verification of her criminal antecedents.
Summary
Meena Devi, a resident of East Champaran, applied for anticipatory bail after the police registered a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act alleging recovery of 13 litres of liquor from her house. She argued that she was not in actual possession, the house is joint family property, and the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act abolished the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail. The Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of furnishing bail bonds and sureties, subject to verification of her criminal antecedents under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The order also required her to deposit a further amount with the Advocates’ Association. The provisional bail will be confirmed if she is found to have only one prior case, otherwise it will be withdrawn.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender applies after the 2018 amendment to the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether joint family ownership of the premises negates the petitioner’s liability for the alleged liquor possession.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act (BNSS) — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3287 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-349 Year-2025 Thana- PIPRAKOTHI District- East Champaran
======================================================
Meena Devi W/o Late Banarsi Sah Resident of Village- Wat Ganj, P.S.-
Piprakothi, District- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anil Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Mukesh Kumar 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 has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and is
a woman and allegation is of recovery of 13 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.3287 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 as such Chowkidar implicated
her only to coerce her husband into submission.
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. 5,000/- (Rupees
Five Thousand) 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 Piprakothi P.S. Case
No. 349 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 more than one
case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3287 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
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 has
antecedent of one case in that event the provisional anticipatory
bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
8. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner
based on instruction submits that petitioner undertakes to deposit
an amount of Rs. 1,500/- with Advocates’ Association, Patna High
Court.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…