Patna High Court
Pinki DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to bond, sureties and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
Pinki Devi applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. after a case was registered against her for alleged offences under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act involving the recovery of liquor from a joint‑family house. The petitioner argued that she was not arrested, no liquor was found in her conscious possession, and the property belonged to the joint family, making it uncertain that she had knowledge of the liquor. She also contended that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act had abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender, and that the case was based on secret information without proper investigation. The State opposed the bail. The Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a Rs 5,000 bond with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, with the bail to be confirmed only if she has no more than one prior case.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when alleged possession of liquor is not proven and the property is joint‑family property.
- Whether the amendment to the Excise Act removing deemed possession affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Section 438
- joint family property
- possession
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38966 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-79 Year-2026 Thana- SACHIVALAYA District- Patna
======================================================
Pinki Devi S/o Ashok Mahto @ Ashok Kumar R/o Vill- Jagjivan Nagar under
chitkohra bridge, P.S-sachivalaya ,District -patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Abhishek Rai
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Kumar Ranjit Ranjan
======================================================
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 one case under the Excise Act
and is a woman and allegation is of recovery of 144.74 litres of
liquor from Jagjeevan Nagar near Chitkohara bridge out of
which 23.5 litres of liquor is alleged to have been recovered
from the house of the petitioner.
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 even the house in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38966 of 2026(2) dt.18-06-2026
2/3
question is a joint family property and thus, it cannot be alleged
with certainty that it was the petitioner, who had kept the liquor
in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his
knowledge and after Amendment in the Excise Act, 2018, the
concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been
done away with and he came to be implicated based on secret
information which is the easiest way to implicate someone
without holding a proper investigation.
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 Sachivalaya P. S. Case No.79 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38966 of 2026(2) dt.18-06-2026
3/3
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner 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
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.