Pramila Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33252 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-548 Year-2022 Thana- DEHRI TOWN District- Rohtas ====================================================== Pramila Devi wife of Dilawar Kharwar village- Ward no. 19, Jakhi Bigha Maninagar, Ps- Dehri town, Dist- rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ashish For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Satyendra Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 18-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending her arrest in connection with Dehri (Town) P.S. Case No. 548 of 2022 dated 21.07.2022 for the offences punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, total 54 litres of illicit liquor was recovered from the house of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. The apprehended co-accused person disclosed the name of the petitioner. The petitioner is a lady. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery. Nothing has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33252 of 2025(2) dt.18-07-2025 2/3 been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has one criminal antecedent in which she is on bail as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. Learned counsel has submitted that no case is made out against the petitioner. Learned Counsel has relied on the judgment of Full Bench of Hon'ble Patna High Court in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav vs. State of Bihar 2019 (2) PLJR 1089. The Full Bench in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav (supra) has held that an application for anticipatory bail in a case arising out of Bihar Excise and Prohibition Act can be maintained, despite the bar under Section 76 (2) of the Act, if on the basis of allegation made in the FIR, no offence under the said provision is made out.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner by submitting that the bar of Section 76(2) of the Act applies in this case. It is further submitted that the recovery has been made from the house of the petitioner. Earlier, the anticipatory bail petition of the petitioner has been disposed of by this Court vide order dated 23.04.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 30482 of 2024.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out and the same is disposed of with direction to the petitioner to surrender before the Court below concerned within
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33252 of 2025(2) dt.18-07-2025 3/3 four weeks from today and pray for regular bail and the learned Court below shall consider the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner on the same day without being prejudiced by this order.
7. The application stands disposed of.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) shivam/- U T