Patna High Court
Baby SoniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail may be granted subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedents and compliance with conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
Summary
The petitioner, Baby Soni, sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of 259.410 litres of liquor from her Tata Safari vehicle. She argued that she had a clean antecedent, was a woman, and was not in possession of the liquor at the time of seizure, merely being the owner of the vehicle. The State opposed the bail, contending the vehicle’s involvement in the alleged offence. The Court, after considering the submissions, directed that she be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of her criminal antecedent and compliance with conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. The order was made conditional that if any antecedent is found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle implicates the petitioner for the alleged offence.
- What conditions must be imposed under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. for granting anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- bail bond
- clean antecedent
- vehicle seizure
- liquor smuggling
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.92031 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-31 Year-2024 Thana- PATHAMARI District- Kishanganj
======================================================
Baby Soni Son of Raj kumar R/o Village - Garib Asthan, Trishul Mandir, P.S.
- Town Thana, Dist. - Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Santosh Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rajesh Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 13-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of her
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The 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 259.410 litres of liquor from a
Tata Safari vehicle.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from her conscious possession and he 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.92031 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
2/3
his own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would create
evidence against himself and hence, would get implicated. It is
further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that
her friend would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, in the
event of her arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on her furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum 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
Pathamari P. S. Case No.31 of 2024, subject to the conditions
laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner 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 obtaining
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.92031 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
3/3
anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court,
in that event, the present 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)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…