Patna High Court
Pinki DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional bail subject to conditions and verification of antecedents.
Summary
Pinki Devi applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC in connection with a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act, where 518,400 litres of liquor were recovered from a motorcycle she owned. The petitioner argued that she was not present at the seizure, had no conscious possession of the liquor, and was unaware that a friend would misuse her vehicle. The State opposed the bail, citing her criminal antecedents, which include four prior cases, two under the Excise Act. The High Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, requiring a bail bond of Rs.20,000 with two sureties and directing verification of her antecedents. The order conditions that if more than four prior cases are found, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 CrPC in the present facts.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence suffices to implicate the owner.
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- vehicle ownership
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38963 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-66 Year-2026 Thana- Panapur District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Pinki Devi W/O Jai Shankar Thakur Resident of Village - Chikanauta, P.S-
Karja, District - Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms.Nitu Kumari
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Syed Ehteshamuddin
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 18-06-2026 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 four cases out of which two
cases are under the Excise Act and is a woman and allegation is
of recovery of 518.400 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.
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 he came to be
implicated based on the fact that she is owner of the seized
vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38963 of 2026(2) dt.18-06-2026
2/3
her own 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
her friend would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged
who also fled from the spot. 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.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty 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 Panapur Kariyat P. S. Case No.66 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.38963 of 2026(2) dt.18-06-2026
3/3
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
found that petitioner has antecedent of more than four cases,
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 only four cases, 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.