Patna High Court
Madhu Devi @ Madhu KumariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of her criminal antecedent and compliance with the conditions of Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
The petitioner, Madhu Devi, sought anticipatory bail after a case was registered under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 17.5 litres of liquor from a scooty she owned. She argued that she had no prior criminal record, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of seizure, and was unaware that a friend misused her vehicle. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering the petitioner's clean antecedent and lack of conscious possession, directed that she be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of her criminal record and compliance with Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. The court ordered that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner who is the owner of the vehicle from which liquor was recovered but was not in possession of the liquor.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of conscious possession justify the grant of anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- possession
- vehicle owner
- clean antecedent
- Section 30
- Section 32
- Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.921 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1744 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Madhu Devi @ Madhu Kumari W/o Kanchan Kumar R/o Village-
Mahammadpur Badal, PS- Sakra, Distt- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shashank Shekhar, Advocate
Mr. Mukund Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ramchandra Sahni, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 19-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case registered
for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) and 32(3) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
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 17.5 litres of liquor from a Scooty. It
is next submitted that 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
owner of the seized vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent
person would use her own vehicle for committing an occurrence
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.921 of 2026(2) dt.19-01-2026
2/3
and thus, would create evidence against herself 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.
4. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
5. 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-bond in the
sum of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge,
Excise, Court No.-II, Muzaffarpur in connection with Excise
P.S. Case No.1744 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down
under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. The application stands allowed.
7. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bond 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.921 of 2026(2) dt.19-01-2026
3/3
anticipatory bail had concealed her 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)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…