Patna High Court

Rimani KumariversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 5 January 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent, under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

Summary

Rimani Kumari was implicated in a case under Sections 30(a) and 41 of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 1.5 litres of liquor from a motorcycle she owned. She contended that she had no conscious possession of the liquor, had a clean antecedent, and was unaware that a friend misused her vehicle. The State opposed her prayer for anticipatory bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that she furnish bail bonds and two sureties, and that the trial court verify her criminal antecedent. If any antecedent is discovered, the bail will not be confirmed; if she is found to have a clean record, the provisional order will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under the Bihar Excise Act when the alleged liquor was not in her conscious possession
Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of knowledge of the alleged offence justify provisional anticipatory bail

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Bihar Excise Act
possession
clean antecedent
motor vehicle
liquor
Section 30
Section 41
provisional bail

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56429 of 2025
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-94 Year-2025 Thana- MESKAUR District- Nawada
                 ======================================================
                 Rimani Kumari Daughter of Rajendra Prasad Vill - Koldiha, P.S - Sirdala,
                 Dist - Nawada

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Birendra Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Satyendra Prasad, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   05-01-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   A.P.P. for the State.

                                The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case

                   registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and

                   41 of the Bihar Excise Act.

                                Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman and

                   allegation is of recovery of 1.5 liters of liquor from a

                   motorcycle.

                                Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner was not apprehended 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56429 of 2025(4) dt.05-01-2026
                                            2/3




          her own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would

          create evidence against herself and hence would get implicated,

          it is also submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that

          her friend would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged.

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

          anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                       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 Trial Court

          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 Meskaur

          P.S. Case No. 94 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down

          under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.

                       It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court

          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 seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed her antecedent

          before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56429 of 2025(4) dt.05-01-2026
                                                        3/3




                      shall not be confirmed, but after verification if 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)
Rishabh/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…