Patna High Court
Sabita Kumari @ Sabita DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedents and compliance with conditions under Section 482(2).
Summary
The petitioner, Sabita Kumari, a government servant, applied for anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act alleging recovery of 1.5 litres of liquor from her government quarters. She contended that the complaint was filed by her son‑in‑law, an Inspector CID, who harboured a personal grievance after her husband filed a case against him, and that no liquor was found in her possession at the time of arrest. The State opposed the bail, but could not refute the allegation of a vendetta‑driven complaint. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, conditioning it on the petitioner furnishing bail bonds and two sureties, and directed the trial court to verify her criminal antecedents. If any prior case is discovered, the bail would be cancelled; otherwise, the provisional order would be confirmed. The order was communicated to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the informant’s personal animus invalidates the credibility of the FIR.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent warrants the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances (BNSS) Act — s. 3(5), 85
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
- DP Act — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- government servant
- false complaint
- personal vendetta
- Section 30 Bihar Excise Act
- Section 482 CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7735 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-965 Year-2025 Thana- SHASTRINAGAR District- Patna
======================================================
Sabita Kumari @ Sabita Devi W/o Chaman Rishi R/o Govt Q No.F/18, Board
Colony, PS- Shastri Nagar, Dist- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sunil Kumar Pathak
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Braj Kishore Pd.(App)
Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Adv
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 23-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the informant.
2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) 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
is a government servant and allegation is of recovery of 1.5
litres of liquor from the government quarter of the petitioner.
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 at the instance of informant, who is her son-in-law
and is an Inspector with the CID. It is next submitted that since
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7735 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
2/4
petitioner is not on cordial term with her son-in-law, as such the
son-in-law taking advantage of his position in the police, got her
implicated with an allegation that meagre amount of liquor was
recovered from her government quarter. It is further submitted
that petitioner, being a government servant, is well aware of the
consequence which would entail in the event if she is implicated
in a case relating to excise. It is also submitted that husband of
the petitioner, namely, Chaman Rishi, had instituted an FIR
with Shasti Nagar PS against the instant informant under
Section 85 and 3(5) of BNS read with Sections 3 and 4 of DP
Act on 14-12-2025. It is next submitted that informant being
aggrieved by the fact that his father-in-law instituted a case against
him got his mother-in-law implicated in the instant case to coerce
his father-in-law into submission. Learned counsel further submits
that the Excise law is draconian and a government servant, if
implicated in a case relating to excise, the chances of his/her
services being terminated is imminent, but then the same is subject
to a departmental proceeding. It is also submitted that the
informant got the petitioner implicated through his minor son, who
is staying with the petitioner and his mother. It is submitted that it
does not appear probable that a 12-year old boy would have
disclosed the name of his own maternal grandmother alleging that
she had kept the liquor in the house. It is next submitted that police
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7735 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
3/4
in a mechanical manner investigates and implicates without
realising the trauma a person faces, when he/she is implicated in a
case relating to Excise. Learned counsel for the petitioner further
submits that bail i.e., anticipatory and regular relating to Excise
law has burdened this Court with unwanted litigation. It is also
submitted that if the anticipatory and regular bail application
relating to Excise is decided in one go that would amount to
lessening the burden of the High Court with respect to bail
application by 40%.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner, but then learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant is not in a position to rebut
the submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner that father-in-law of the informant instituted Shastri
Nagar PS Case No. 940 of 2025 and that petitioner is mother-in-
law of the informant.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner, at this stage, submits that one can well imagine the
grievance the informant has with his in-laws, including the
petitioner that he has rushed to this Court to oppose the
anticipatory bail application of his mother-in-law.
7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7735 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
4/4
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 Shastri
Nagar P.S. Case No. 965 of 2025, subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
8. 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 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.
9. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the
Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna, for his perusal.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…