Patna High Court
Guria Devi @ Gudia KumariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that, in the absence of any criminal antecedent and given the circumstances of joint family property and lack of arrest, provisional anticipatory bail may be granted under Section 438 CrPC, subject to verification of antecedent.
Summary
Guria Devi applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged possession of liquor recovered from a joint family house. The petitioner argued that she has a clean antecedent, is a woman, and that the liquor was found in a shared family property, making it uncertain that she had knowledge or control over it. The prosecution opposed the bail, contending that the offence is non‑bailable. The court considered the submissions, the lack of an arrest, and the petitioner’s clean record, and directed that she be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds and sureties, subject to verification of her antecedent. The order further stipulated that if any criminal antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 CrPC for an offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the fact that the alleged liquor was recovered from a joint family house affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean criminal antecedent influences the court’s decision to grant anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438
- Excise Act
- liquor seizure
- joint family property
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.631 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-402 Year-2025 Thana- ATRI District- Gaya
======================================================
Guria Devi @ Gudia Kumari W/O Om Prakash Manjhi @ Awadhesh Manjhi
R/o Vill.- Dihuri, Upathu, P.O.- Atri, P.S.- Atri, Dist.- Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anuj Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Kanhiya Kishor
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 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 35 litres of liquor from the
house of three accused persons out of which 15 litres of liquor is
alleged to have been recovered from the house of the petitioner
along with 1000 litres of jawa mahua from the house of all the
accused persons, which was destroyed.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.631 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/3
recovered from her conscious possession and even the house in
question is a joint family property and thus, it cannot be alleged
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 she came to be implicated at the instance of
Chaukidar, but then, it is submitted that if Chaukidar was aware
of the involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence, then why
he did not inform the police prior to institution of the present
F.I.R., which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.
It is also submitted that Chaukidar is on an inimical term with
her husband.
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
Atri P. S. Case No.402 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.631 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/3
down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
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…