Patna High Court
Babita DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that provisional anticipatory bail may be granted, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedents and compliance with the conditions imposed under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
The petitioner, Babita Devi, sought anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022 for alleged possession of 947.475 litres of liquor recovered from her son’s house and shop. She argued that she has a clean antecedent, is a woman, and that the liquor was not in her conscious possession; the house is joint family property and the alleged evidence stems from confessional statements of her son and another person made in police custody, which she claimed lack evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a modest bail bond, two sureties, and a condition that the trial court verify her criminal antecedents before confirming the bail. If any antecedent is found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022.
- Whether confessional statements made in police custody can form a basis for arrest and denial of bail.
- Whether the joint family nature of the property and lack of direct possession can preclude liability of the petitioner.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- confessional statement
- joint family property
- clean antecedent
- Section 482 inherent powers
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90964 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-438 Year-2025 Thana- MINAPUR District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Babita Devi W/o- Vishwanath Rai Vill- Turki Sanichara Astan PS- Minapur
District-Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vibhuti Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-01-2026 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
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022.
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 947.475 litres of liquor from house
and shop of petitioner’s son Sarvesh Kumar. It is next
submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such
nothing was recovered from her conscious possession and the
house in question is a joint family property as such it cannot be
alleged with certainty that it was petitioner, who had kept the
liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within her
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90964 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
2/3
knowledge and the shop is looked after by her son with whom
she has no concern and she came to be implicated based on
confessional statement of Sunny and Sarvesh in police custody
which does not have any evidentiary value. It is further
submitted that no son would confess the name of her mother
until he is pressurized.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
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 Minapur
P.S. Case No.438/2025, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one
case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90964 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
3/3
concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
on verification 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)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…