Ruby Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35269 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-806 Year-2025 Thana- SHASTRINAGAR District- Patna ====================================================== Ruby Devi W/o Late Jivan Mistri Resident of - Mauraya Path, Khajpura, P.O - B. V College, P.S - Shastri Nagar, District - Patna, Pin - 800014, Aadhar No. 318779802176 ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Roushan Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Umanath Mishra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 22-06-2026

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 has antecedent of three cases under the Excise Act and is a woman and allegation is of recovery of 8 liters of liquor from house of the petitioner and 52 liters of liquor from a place near a drain situated beside the hut.

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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35269 of 2026(3) dt.22-06-2026 2/3 question is a joint family property, as such, it cannot be alleged 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. It is next submitted that 52 liters of liquor was recovered from a place which does not belong to the petitioner, but then is adjacent to her house and she came to be implicated at the instance of local person, but then it is submitted that if local person 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.

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. 15000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35269 of 2026(3) dt.22-06-2026 3/3 the case is pending/successor court in connection with Shashtri Nagar P.S. Case No. 806 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 more than three cases 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 has antecedent of three cases only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T