Rita DeviversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43367 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-4 Year-2023 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Jamui
                 ======================================================
                 Rita Devi wife of Krishna Yadav Resident of village- Baramasia, Ps- Jhajha,
                 Dist- Jamui

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Sanju Singh
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Md. Iftekhar Mahmood
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   02-07-2026                  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 Sections 30(a), 41(1)

                   and 41(2) of 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 9.375 litres of liquor from a

                   motorcycle. It is next submitted 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 vehicle. It is next submitted that no

                   prudent person would use her own vehicle for committing an

                   occurrence and thus would create evidence against herself and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43367 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026
                                            2/3




          hence would get implicated. It is thus submitted that the

          petitioner was completely unaware that Bittu would misuse her

          vehicle in the manner as alleged, who was also apprehended

          from the spot. It is also submitted that it is not the case of the

          prosecution that they saw any woman fleeing from the place of

          occurrence.

                       4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

          anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                       5. Considering the submissions made by the learned

          counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the

          event of his 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 Jam P.S. Case No.04/2023, subject to the

          conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

                       6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter

          shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the

          event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one

          case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had

          concealed her antecedent before this court, as such, the
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43367 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026
                                                         3/3




                       provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if

                       on verification it is found that petitioner is a person with clean

                       antecedent, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order

                       shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                 (Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-

U        T