Patna High Court
Rita 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 antecedent.
Summary
Rita Devi, the wife of Ramchandra Yadav, was implicated in an excise case after 120.960 litres of liquor were recovered from a car she owned. She applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code, arguing that she was not present at the spot, had no conscious possession of the liquor, and was unaware of any misuse of her vehicle. The prosecution opposed the bail, citing her prior involvement in an excise case. The court noted that ownership alone does not prove participation, especially for a woman with only one prior case, and therefore granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and verification of her criminal antecedent. If the verification reveals more than one prior case, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to a vehicle owner alleged to be involved in an offence under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise offence
- Section 30(a) Excise Act
- Section 438 CrPC
- vehicle ownership liability
- criminal antecedent
- women
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33218 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-84 Year-2026 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Madhubani
======================================================
Rita Devi W/o Ramchandra Yadav R/o vill - Nazirpur, P.S.- Rahika, Distt.-
Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bhavesh Kumar Sah
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar Jha
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 14-05-2026 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 has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act
and is a woman and allegation is of recovery of 120.960 litres of
liquor from a car.
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 car.
It is next submitted that no prudent person would use her own
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33218 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026
2/3
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
Ramchandra would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged
as he was also apprehended at the spot along with Virendra
Yadav. 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.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 Sadar Excise P. S. Case No.84 of 2026, 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.33218 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026
3/3
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
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 has antecedent of one case only, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.