Babita Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5411 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-9 Year-2025 Thana- Araria Sangram District- Madhubani ====================================================== Babita Devi wife of Rameshwar Das Resident of Village- Singrahi, PSLaukaha, District- Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Jitendra Kumar Bharti, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 02-02-2026

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 offences punishable under Sections 274 and 275 of the BNS as well as Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is woman and allegation is of recovery of 36 litres of liquor from 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 her own vehicle for committing an occurrence

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5411 of 2026(2) dt.02-02-2026 2/3 and thus would create evidence against herself and hence would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that Vivek Kumar Yadav would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged who was also apprehended from the spot along with Roushan Kumar Yadav.

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 Arariya Sangram P.S. Case No. 09 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the BNSS.

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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5411 of 2026(2) dt.02-02-2026 3/3 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