Parwati Devi @ Pawarti Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7226 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-255 Year-2025 Thana- CHANPATIA District- West Champaran ====================================================== Parwati Devi @ Pawarti Devi Wife of Hiralal Dhangad @ Hiralal Dhagad Resident of Village - Lagunaha, Dhangad Tola, Puraina Gusai, P.S.- Chanpatiya, District - West Champaran, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Mayank Mohan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 19-02-2026

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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

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 21.250 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner.

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 the house in question is a joint family property, as such, it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was the petitioner who

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7226 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026 2/3 had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within her knowledge. It is next submitted that petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of the Chawkidar and local person but then it is submitted that it absolutely does not stand to reason how local persons were came to know that it was petitioner who had concealed the liquor in the house. It is also submitted that the husband of the petitioner is on an inimical term with the Chawkidar, as such, the Chawkidar implicated her with an intent to coerce her husband into submission.

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 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 Chanpatiya P.S. Case No. 255 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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7226 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026 3/3 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 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