Sarita Kumari @ Sarita Devi Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2024)

Sarita Kumari @ Sarita Devi Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Prayer for anticipatory bail granted. Petitioner, on arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within six weeks, to be released on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the court below where Laukaha P.S. Case No. 130 of 2024 is pending, subject to Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. conditions; bail bonds to be accepted only after the trial court verifies the petitioner's criminal antecedents, failing which the anticipatory bail order shall not be given effect to.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, who apprehends arrest in Laukaha P.S. Case No. 130 of 2024 (registered for offences under Sections 272 and 273 IPC and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022), should be granted anticipatory bail.

Court's answer

Anticipatory bail granted: in the event of the petitioner's arrest or surrender before the Court below within six weeks, she is to be released on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 500/- with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to the conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C., in connection with Laukaha P.S. Case No. 130 of 2024.

Ratio / Principle

The learned trial court, before accepting the bail bonds of the petitioner, shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner.

Key takeaways

If the petitioner is found to have a criminal antecedent of even one case, the present anticipatory bail order shall not be given effect to.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

ANTICIPATORY BAIL GRANTED (Patna High Court, CR. MISC. No.66563 of 2024, Satyavrat Verma, J., oral order dt.13-09-2024): The petitioner, apprehending arrest in Laukaha P.S. Case No. 130 of 2024 (Madhubani) registered for offences punishable under Sections 272 and 273 IPC and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, following allegation of recovery of 30 litres of liquor from her house, was permitted, in the event of arrest or surrender before the Court below within six weeks, to be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500/- with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. The learned trial court was directed, before accepting the bail bonds, to verify the petitioner's criminal antecedents; if an antecedent of even one case is found, the present anticipatory bail order shall not be given effect to. Counsel had submitted that petitioner has clean antecedents, was not arrested from the spot, that the house is joint family property, and that after the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender have been done away with; the court granted bail 'considering the submissions made'.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66563 of 2024

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-130 Year-2024 Thana- LAUKAHA District- Madhubani

======================================================

Sarita Kumari @ Sarita Devi Wife of Late Bhola Sah Resident of VillagePahari Tola, P.S.- Laukaha, Dist.- Madhubani

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramchandra Jha Raman, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nand Kumar, A.P.P. ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

2 13-09-2024

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 272 and 273 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent.

Allegation is of recovery of 30 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from her conscious possession 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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66563 of 2024(2) dt.13-09-2024 2/3

is further submitted that the house in question is a joint family property, as such, it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was the petitioner who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within her knowledge. It is next submitted that petitioner came to be implicated based on the secret informant which is the easiest way to implicate someone, when petitioner admittedly is a person with clean antecedent.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner above-named, in the event of her arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on 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 court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Laukaha P.S. Case No. 130 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

However, the learned trial court, before accepting the bail bonds of the petitioner, shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if it is found that petitioner has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66563 of 2024(2) dt.13-09-2024 3/3

antecedent of even one case in that event the present anticipatory bail order shall not be given effect to.

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U T