Lalita Devi @ Lalita Kumari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14378 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-431 Year-2025 Thana- CHANDAUTI District- Gaya ====================================================== Lalita Devi @ Lalita Kumari W/o Jitendra Chaudhary, D/o Puji Chaudhari Resident of Village- Kujapi, P.S.- Chandauti, Distt.- Gayaji (Gaya) ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Krishna Prabhat For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Shyameshwar Dayal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 13-03-2026 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 Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman and allegation is of recovery of 4.875 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from her conscious possession and the house in question is a joint family property as such it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was petitioner who had kept the liquor in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14378 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026 2/3 the house or the liquor kept in the house was within knowledge of the petitioner. It is next submitted that after amendment in the Excise Act in the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away with and she came to be implicated at the instance of Chowkidar with whom her husband is on an inimical term. It is also submitted that in order to coerce her husband into submission, Chowkidar implicated the petitioner, when petitioner admittedly is a person with clean antecedent.
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, 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 Chandauti P.S. Case No. 431 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 petitioner and in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14378 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026 3/3 then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed her antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after verification if 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) Sumit/- U T