Patna High Court

Chhathi DeviversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 18 June 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of her criminal antecedent.

Summary

Chhathi Devi, a woman with no prior criminal record, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 22 litres of liquor from a hut near Bankipur Club Gate. She applied for anticipatory bail, arguing that the liquor was recovered from a location not belonging to her and that there was no evidence of her possession or arrest at the spot. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and conditioned the order on verification of her criminal antecedent by the trial court. If any antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed forthwith.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of possession justify the grant of bail

Legislation cited

Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a)
B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Section 30(a)
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
criminal antecedent
provisional bail
women

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38950 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-161 Year-2026 Thana- GANDHIMAIDAN District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Chhathi Devi W/O Manoj Das R/o Bada Machhuara, P.S.- Aurai, Distt-
                 Muzaffarpur. A/P Near Jhoparpatti in front of Gate of Bankipur Club, P.S.-
                 Gandhi Maidan, District-Patna
                                                                            ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                  Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                     ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Ram Jiban Pd Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Ms. Shaheen Begum, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   18-06-2026                  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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman and

                   allegation is of recovery of 22 litres of liquor from a hut near

                   Bankipur Club Gate.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was

                   recovered from her conscious possession and even the alleged

                   recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner

                   and she came to be implicated based on the secret information
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38950 of 2026(2) dt.18-06-2026
                                            2/3




          which is the easiest way to implicate someone without holding a

          proper investigation of the case, when petitioner admittedly is a

          person with clean antecedent.

                       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 appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let the petitioner,

          above-named, in the event of her arrest or surrender within a

          period of six weeks from today, be released on provisional

          anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds 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 Gandhi Maidan

          P.S. Case No. 161 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid

          down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

                       7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned

          Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner

          and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case,

          it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed her

          antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail

          application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order

          shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38950 of 2026(2) dt.18-06-2026
                                                       3/3




                     petitioner is a person with clean antecedent in that event the

                     provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.


                                                                          (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U     T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.