Rinku Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15214 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-339 Year-2025 Thana- DORIGANJ District- Saran ====================================================== 1.
Rinku Devi Wife of Birendra Nut @ Birendra Nat Resident of village - Musepur, Police Station - Doriganj, District - Saran at Chapra 2.
Kundan Nut Son of Rajesh Nut Resident of village - Musepur, Police Station - Doriganj, District - Saran at Chapra 3.
Suraj Nut Son of Sharwan Nut Resident of village - Musepur, Police Station - Doriganj, District - Saran at Chapra ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Narendra Kumar, Advocate Mr. Akash Ambuj, Advocate Ms. Anushka Kumari, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Md. Nazir Ansari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 03-04-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no. 1 is a person with clean antecedent and petitioner nos. 2 and 3 have antecedent of one case and allegation is of recovery of 210 liters of liquor from a place near a pond.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners were not apprehended from the spot as such nothing
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15214 of 2026(3) dt.03-04-2026 2/3 was recovered from their conscious possession and even alleged recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioners, but then is adjacent to their house, as such, they came to be implicated based on suspicion by local person, but then the name of the person who disclosed the name of the petitioners is not disclosed in the FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the event of their 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. 5000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) each 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 Doriganj P.S. Case No. 339 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the event if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15214 of 2026(3) dt.03-04-2026 3/3 even one and petitioner nos. 2 and 3 have antecedent of more than one case then it would be presumed that petitioners, for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed their antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed with respect to the petitioner who had concealed his antecedent, but after verification if it is found that petitioner no. 1 is a person with clean antecedent and petitioner nos. 2 and 3 have antecedent of only one case, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T