Patna High Court
Sunita DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to provisional anticipatory bail, subject to conditions, because she has a clean antecedent and no evidence of conscious possession of the alleged liquor.
Summary
The High Court of Patna considered an application for anticipatory bail filed by Sunita Devi, who was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for allegedly concealing 215 litres of liquor. The petitioner argued that she has a clean criminal record, is a woman, and that the alleged liquor was recovered from a location not belonging to her, with no evidence of her conscious possession. The State opposed the bail, contending that the seriousness of the offence warranted detention. The Court examined the petitioner’s antecedent, the nature of the alleged offence, and the statutory provisions governing anticipatory bail. It granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a modest bail bond and sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent by the trial court. The order stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of direct possession justify the grant of bail.
- What conditions should be imposed on the provisional anticipatory bail order.
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
- clean antecedent
- Cr.P.C. Section 438
- B.N.S.S. Section 482
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46431 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-247 Year-2026 Thana- KANTI District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Sunita Devi W/O Shambhu Sahani R/O Vill.- Kanti Kothiya, P.s.- Kanti,
Dist.- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rakesh Ambastha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 14-07-2026 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 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 215 litres of liquor concealed under
the damp of NTPC.
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 at the instance of the spy i.e.
secret information which is the easiest way to implicate
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46431 of 2026(2) dt.14-07-2026
2/3
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 Kanti P.S. Case No.
247 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
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent in that event the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46431 of 2026(2) dt.14-07-2026
3/3
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.