Rupa Kumari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32330 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-104 Year-2026 Thana- MOTIHARI TOWN District- East Champaran ====================================================== Rupa Kumari D/o Rambhu Sahani, w/o Nikesh Kumar Sahani Resident of village - Jogiya, P.S.- Harsidhi, Distt.- East Champaran. At present R/o vill - Belbanwa, P.s.- Motihari Town, Distt.- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Abhishek Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Syed Mojibur Rahman ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 13-05-2026
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 petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman and allegation is of recovery of 10 liters of liquor from house of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not apprehended 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32330 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026 2/3 with certainty that it was petitioner who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within her knowledge and 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 local person, but then it is submitted that if Chowkidar was aware of the involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence then why he did not inform the police prior to institution of the instant FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution, 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 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 Motihari Town P.S. Case No. 104 of 2026 subject to the conditions as laid
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32330 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026 3/3 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 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) Rishabh/- U T