Raj Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.617 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-205 Year-2025 Thana- ATRI District- Gaya ====================================================== Raj Kumari W/o- Uday Kumar R/v- Nischalganj Manih (Manikpur) Habbipur Ps- Parwalpur Dist- Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Piyush Kant Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Pradeep Narain Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 15-01-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of her arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.

3. The 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 1460.040 litres of liquor from a Tata Magic vehilce.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from her conscious possession and he came to be implicated based on the fact that she is owner of the seized vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.617 of 2026(3) dt.15-01-2026 2/3 her own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would create evidence against herself and hence, would get implicated. It is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that Shashikant would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged as he was also apprehended at the spot along with Ram Kanhaiya Kumar.

5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail application.

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 Court below within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on provisional anticipatory bail on her furnishing bail-bonds in the sum 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 Atri P. S. Case No.205 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

7. The application stands allowed.

8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.617 of 2026(3) dt.15-01-2026 3/3 found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, then it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed her antecedent before this Court, in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but if on verification, 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) vikash/- U T