Patna High Court
Anila DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that anticipatory bail may be granted subject to conditions, as the petitioner’s alleged possession is not established and she has a clean antecedent.
Summary
Anila Devi applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act, alleging recovery of liquor from a third party and from her joint family house. She argued that she had no conscious possession, the FIR did not name her, and the amendment to the Excise Act had removed the concept of deemed possession. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, directed that she be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of her antecedent. The order stipulated that if any criminal antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith. The application for anticipatory bail was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 CrPC for an alleged offence under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner can be deemed to have possession of liquor under the amended Excise Act.
- Whether the absence of the petitioner’s name in the FIR affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- possession
- joint family property
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5032 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-341 Year-2025 Thana- BHARGAMA District- Araria
======================================================
Anila Devi W/o Balram Sardar Resident of Village- Bhaiyaram Bishanpur,
ward no. 09, P.S.- Bhargama, District- Araria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Gopal Kumar Jha
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Renuka Ratnakar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 02-02-2026 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 is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman
and allegation is of recovery of 05 litres of liquor from
possession of Bittu Raja and 14 litres of liquor from 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
question is a joint family property and thus, it cannot be alleged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5032 of 2026(2) dt.02-02-2026
2/3
with certainty that it was the petitioner, who had kept the liquor
in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within her
knowledge and after Amendment in the Excise Act, 2018, the
concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been
done away with and she came to be implicated at the instance of
local person, but the name of the person, who disclosed the
name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the F.I.R., which casts
an aspersion on the case of the prosecution and petitioner has no
concern or relation with Bittu Raja.
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.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
Bhargama P. S. Case No.341 of 2025, subject to the conditions
laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5032 of 2026(2) dt.02-02-2026
3/3
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
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 even 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 is a person with clean antecedent, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…