Patna High Court
Kosalya Devi @ Kaushalya DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to specified conditions and verification of her criminal antecedent.
Summary
Petitioner Kosalya Devi sought anticipatory bail after the police registered a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 alleging that 75 litres of liquor were recovered from a motorcycle and a mobile phone registered in her name was seized. She contended that she was not the owner of the vehicle, had no conscious possession of the liquor, and was unaware that her friend would misuse the mobile, which was later used to implicate her. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offence. The Court, after hearing both sides, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.1,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. The Court further directed the trial court to verify her criminal antecedent, stating that if more than one prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed, whereas if only one prior case exists, the bail would be confirmed.
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 (Amendment) Act, 2022.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 — 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 Procedure Code
- mobile phone seizure
- liquor seizure
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.47722 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-162 Year-2026 Thana- DAUDNAGAR District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Kosalya Devi @ Kaushalya Devi Wife of Santu Yadav @ Sanju Yadav
Resident of Village- Mahadeva PS- Obra, District- Aurangabad Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Rupa Kumari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anand Kishore Choudhary, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 10-07-2026 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 (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and is
a woman and allegation is of recovery of 75 litres of liquor from
a motorcycle and a mobile was seized.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from her conscious possession. It is further submitted
that petitioner is not the owner of the seized vehicle and came to
be implicated based on the fact that the mobile was registered in
her name. It is next submitted that petitioner was completely
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47722 of 2026(2) dt.10-07-2026
2/3
unaware that her friend would misuse the mobile in the manner
as alleged who also fled from the spot after throwing it. It is also
submitted that it is not the case of the prosecution that they saw
a woman fleeing from the place of occurrence.
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.1,000/- (Rupees
One 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 Daudnagar P.S.
Case No. 162 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 more than 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47722 of 2026(2) dt.10-07-2026
3/3
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner has antecedent of only one case in that event the
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.