Patna High Court
Sudama DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions and verification of her antecedent.
Summary
Sudama Devi, the wife of Hitesh Singh, sought anticipatory bail after the police registered a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for the recovery of 15 litres of liquor, a country-made pistol and three live cartridges from her husband's house. The petitioner argued that she was not present at the scene, had no possession of the contraband, and was implicated solely because of her marital relationship, with the informant (chowkidar) failing to report her involvement earlier. The State opposed the bail, contending that the allegations warranted her arrest. The Court, considering her gender, clean antecedent, and lack of direct involvement, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.500 and two sureties, and directed verification of her criminal record by the trial court. It further stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed, but if she remains clean, the bail would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s marital relationship and lack of direct possession justify granting bail.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- liquor seizure
- firearm possession
- gender considerations
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.858 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-288 Year-2025 Thana- CHAUTHAM District- Khagaria
======================================================
Sudama Devi Wife of Hitesh Singh Resident of village - Tegachhi, P.S.-
Chautham, District - Khagaria.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Santosh Kumar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Kanhiya Kishor
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 19-01-2026 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 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
allegation is of recovery of 15 litres of liquor along with country
made pistol and three live cartridges from the house of Hitesh
Singh.
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 wife of Hitesh based on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.858 of 2026(2) dt.19-01-2026
2/3
the disclosure made by the Chowkidar, but then it is submitted
that if the Chowkidar was aware about the involvement of the
petitioner in the occurrence, then why he did not inform the
police prior to institution of the instant FIR, which casts an
aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is also submitted that
petitioner has been implicated only to coerce Hitesh into
submission.
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 and also taking into consideration that
petitioner is a woman, 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 Chautham P.S. Case
No. 288 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.858 of 2026(2) dt.19-01-2026
3/3
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.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…