Ful Kumari @ Kariyai DeviversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90517 of 2025
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-113 Year-2022 Thana- RIVILGANJ District- Saran
                 ======================================================
                 Ful Kumari @ Kariyai Devi D/O Late Buddhu Bin @ Budhman Bin R/O Vill-
                 Alekh Tola, Sitab Diara, P.O- Gariba Tola, P.S- Rivilganj, Dist- Saran at
                 Chapra- 841312.
                                                                           ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                 Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                    ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Jeetendra Narayan, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Akbar Ali, 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 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 12 litres of liquor from the house of

                   the petitioner.

                                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 the house in question is a joint family property, as such, it

                   cannot be alleged with certainty that it was the petitioner who
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90517 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
                                            2/3




          had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house

          was within her knowledge and after amendment in the Excise

          Act in the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and

          presumed offender has been done away with. It is next

          submitted that petitioner came to be implicated based on the

          secret information which is the easiest way to implicate

          someone.

                       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 his 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 Rivilganj

          P.S. Case No. 113 of 2022, 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
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90517 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
                                                       3/3




                     would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his antecedent

                     before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail application in

                     that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be

                     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