Rinku Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14551 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-88 Year-2024 Thana- Sinha District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Rinku Devi Wife of Jiwan Yadav @ Jiut Yadav Resident of Village - Farahada, P.S.- Barhara, District - Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 02-04-2025
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 (Amendment) Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman.
4. Allegation is of recovery of 14 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from her conscious possession and after amendment in the Excise Act in the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away with. It is further submitted that the house in question is a joint family
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14551 of 2025(2) dt.02-04-2025 2/3 property, as such, it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was the petitioner who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within her knowledge. It is further submitted that petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of the local people but then the name of the person who disclosed the name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
7. 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 Court below 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 court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Sinha P.S. Case No. 88 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
8. 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 in that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14551 of 2025(2) dt.02-04-2025 3/3 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