Patna High Court
Kavita DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, subject to bond, sureties, and verification of antecedent.
Summary
Petitioner Kavita Devi, wife of Biran Rai, feared arrest in a case under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 38.34 litres of liquor from a motorcycle she owned. She asserted that she had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor, and was unaware that the vehicle was misused by Gauri Shankar and Dheeraj. The State opposed her prayer for anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs. 500 and two sureties of the same amount, subject to verification of her criminal antecedent. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith. The decision was based on the provisions of Section 482(2) of the BNSS and the principles governing anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in a case under the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence implicates the petitioner for anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act (BNSS) — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- Section 482
- Bihar Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7707 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-463 Year-2025 Thana- EXCISE DANAPUR District- Patna
======================================================
Kavita Devi wife of Biran Rai @ Biran Kumar @ Biran Ray R/o - Chourasiya
Suarmarwa, P.S - Maner, District - Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pankaj Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Kanhiya Kishor
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 23-02-2026 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 offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and
32(3) of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. 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 38.34 litres of liquor from a
motorcycle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was not arrested 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.7707 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
2/3
her own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would
create evidence against herself and hence would get implicated,
it is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware
that Gauri Shankar would misuse the vehicle in the manner as
alleged, who was also apprehneded from the spot along with
Dheeraj.
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 for the petitioner, 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. 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 Excise Danapur P.S. Case No. 463 of 2025,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of
the BNSS.
7. 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7707 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
3/3
Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order 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)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…