KAJAL DEVIversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38840 of 2026
                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-88 Year-2026 Thana- KOCHADHAMAN District- Kishanganj
                 ======================================================
                 KAJAL DEVI Wife of Late Pappu Kumar Singh Resident of Village- Bari
                 Yusufpur, Hazipur, Ward No. 38, P.S.- Industrial Area (Audyogik Keshetra),
                 District- Vaishali.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :     Mr.Mritunjay Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :     Ms.Asha Kumari, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   02-07-2026                    Heard Mr.Mritunjay Kumar, learned counsel for the

                   petitioner and        Ms.Asha Kumari, learned Additional Public

                   Prosecutor for the State.

                                2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in

                   connection with Kochadhaman P.S.Case No.88 of 2026,FIR

                   dated 16.02.2026 registered for the offences punishable under

                   Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act,

                   2022.

                                3. Recovery is of 404.00 liters of illegal Indian made

                   foreign liquor.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner has clean antecedent. The allegation as alleged in the

                   FIR is false and fabricated. In fact nothing has been recovered
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38840 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026
                                            2/4




          from conscious possession of the petitioner rather the recovery

          has been made from the vehicle in question and petitioner has

          been made accused in the present case merely on the ground

          that he is owner of the vehicle in question. In fact his son

          namely, Harsh Raj was apprehended alongwith vehicle in

          question and vehicle in question is registered in the name of the

          petitioner so the petitioner has been made accused in the present

          case. There is non-compliance with mandatory procedure

          prescribed for recovery under Section 100 of Cr.P.C./Section

          103 of BNSS, 2023. No case, whatsoever, would be made out

          against the petitioners under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise

          Act.

                       5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

          opposed the prayer for 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

          reported in 2019 (2) PLJR 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38840 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026
                                            3/4




          of anticipatory bail, is inclined to accept the submission of

          Counsel for the petitioner.

                       7. Considering the aforesaid facts, petitioner has clean

          antecedent, nothing has been recovered from conscious

          possession of the petitioner, he has been made accused in the

          present case merely on the ground that he is owner of the

          vehicle in question and his son was apprehended alongwith

          illicit liquor and the vehicle in question, let the petitioner, above

          named, in the event of his 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 learned Exclusive Special Judge

          Excise-1, Kishanganj in connection with Kochadhaman

          P.S.Case No.88 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down

          under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/

          Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with other following

          conditions:-

                       (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 his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38840 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026
                                                           4/4




                         reason, his/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 his/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)
Nitesh/-

U          T