Patna High Court
Vimal Devi @ Vimla DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act.
Summary
The petitioners, Vimal Devi, Kundan Kumar and Chandan Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 274 and 275 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, relating to the alleged recovery of 50.52 litres of liquor from a paddy field. They argued that they were not caught in possession, the recovered liquor was from a public area, and the complaint originated from a watchman whose prior knowledge was questionable. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties, verification of criminal antecedents, and a deposit of Rs.2,500 with the High Court Legal Services Committee. The order stipulated that if the petitioners’ antecedents were found to be clean (or limited as claimed), the bail would be confirmed; otherwise, it would not be confirmed. The court thus allowed the petition for anticipatory bail with conditions.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail to the petitioners under Sections 274, 275 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022?
- Whether the circumstances of alleged recovery and lack of possession justify bail?
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 274, 275
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2), 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 274
- Section 275
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Criminal antecedent
- bail bond
- High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4948 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-404 Year-2025 Thana- SHAHPUR PATORI District- Samastipur
======================================================
1. Vimal Devi @ Vimla Devi S/O Siyaram Ray R/O - Pyarepur, P.S- Patori,
District- Samstipur
2. Kundan Kumar S/O Siyaram Ray R/O - Pyarepur, P.S- Patori, District-
Samstipur
3. Chandan Kumar Ray @ Chandan Kumar S/O Siyaram Ray R/O - Pyarepur,
P.S- Patori, District- Samstipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rabindra Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 02-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.
Rabindra Kumar, learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 274 and
275 of the BNS as well as Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition
and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners no. 1 and 2 are persons with clean antecedent and
petitioner no. 3 has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act
and petitioner no. 1 is a woman and allegation is of recovery of
50.52 ltires of liquor from a paddy field and a banana orchard.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4948 of 2026(2) dt.02-02-2026
2/3
petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from their conscious possession and even the alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the
petitioners and is accessible to villagers at large. It is next
submitted that petitioners came to be implicated at the instance
of the Chawkidar but then it is submitted that if the Chawkidar
was aware of the involvement of the petitioners in the
occurrence then why he did not inform the police prior to the
institution of the instant FIR which casts an aspersion on the
case of the prosecution.
5. Mr. Rabindra Kumar, learned A.P.P. for the State
opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, let the petitioners above-named, in
the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned trial
court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) each 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
Patori P.S. Case No. 404 of 2025, subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4948 of 2026(2) dt.02-02-2026
3/3
BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial
court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and
if it is found that petitioners no. 1 and 2 have antecedent of even
one case and petitioner no. 3 has antecedent of more than one
case, it would be presumed that petitioners had concealed their
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
petitioners no. 1 and 2 are persons with clean antecedent and
petitioner no. 3 has antecedent of only one case in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
8. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners
based on instruction submits that petitioners undertake to
deposit an amount of Rs.2,500/- with the High Court Legal
Services Committee, Patna within a period of two weeks from
today.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…