Patna High Court
Rani 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
The petitioner, Rani Devi, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2016 after 51.75 litres of liquor were recovered from a bag placed beside her motorcycle. She argued that she had no prior criminal record, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of seizure, and was unaware of any misuse of her vehicle by a friend. The State opposed her application for anticipatory bail. The Court considered her clean antecedent, the lack of direct possession, and the principle that ownership of a vehicle does not automatically imply participation in the offence. Accordingly, the Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a modest bond, sureties, and verification of her antecedent, with confirmation to follow if she remains clean.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code in a case of alleged liquor possession under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2016.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence constitutes sufficient grounds for arrest and denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- liquor seizure
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- gender considerations
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90444 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-65 Year-2025 Thana- HATHIDAH District- Patna
======================================================
Rani Devi W/o Arvind Mahto @ Arvind Kumar R/o Village- Sisouni Ward
No.25, P.S- Mokama, Dist- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Parmod Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Pushpa Sinha-1, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-01-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman and
allegation is of recovery of 51.75 litres of liquor from a bag kept
adjacent to a motorcycle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from her conscious possession. It is further submitted
that petitioner 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 his own vehicle for committing an occurrence
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90444 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
2/3
and thus would create evidence against himself 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.
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, let 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 Hathidah
P.S. Case No. 65 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial
court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if
it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, it
would be presumed that petitioner had concealed her antecedent
before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail application in
that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90444 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
3/3
confirmed but if it is found on verification that petitioner is a
person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…