Durga @ Durga Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48730 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-4 Year-2025 Thana- RAMGARH District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== Durga @ Durga Devi Wife of Guddu Singh Resident of Village- Jaburna, P.S.- Dildarnagar, District- Ghazipur (U.P.) ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Pawan Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms. Indu Kumari Srivastava, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-07-2026
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 317(5) of the BNS as well as Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
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 45 litres of liquor from a motorcycle and one more motorcycle was seized.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from her conscious possession. It is further submitted that petitioner came to be implicated based on the fact that she is owner of one of the seized vehicles. It is next submitted that no
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48730 of 2026(2) dt.16-07-2026 2/3 prudent person would use her own vehicle for committing an occurrence and, thus, would create evidence against herself and, hence, would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that Vivek Sharma would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged who was also apprehended from the spot along with Pankaj Kumar Yadav and Chhathu Bind. It is lastly submitted that it is not the case of the prosecution that they saw a woman fleeing from the place of occurrence.
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 appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let 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 Ramgarh P.S. Case No. 04 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48730 of 2026(2) dt.16-07-2026 3/3 Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed her antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail application in that 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