Pinki Kumari Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bhavesh Kumar Sah For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Manoj Kumar ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶11

4 22-06-2026

¶12

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

¶13

2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 274, 275 and 3(5) of BNS and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.

¶14

3. 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 945 litres of liquor from five motorcycles and a bicycle.

¶15

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from her conscious possession and she came to be implicated based on the fact that she is owner of one of the seized motorcycles. It is next submitted that no prudent person

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22977 of 2026(4) dt.22-06-2026 2/3

¶17

would use her own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would create evidence against herself and hence would get implicated, it is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that her friend would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged, who also fled from the spot. It is also submitted that it is not a case of the prosecution that they saw a woman fleeing from the place of occurrence.

¶18

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

¶19

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, 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 Saharghat P.S. Case No. 155 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

¶20

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 even one case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed her antecedent before this

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22977 of 2026(4) dt.22-06-2026 3/3

¶22

Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

¶23

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

¶24

Sumit/-

¶25

U T

Pinki Kumari v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pinki Kumari v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raushan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ajit Singh @ Ajit Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Munna Yadav @ Munna Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Syed Faiz Ahmad @ Syed Faiz Vs The State of Bihar

Ashok Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Bablu Keshri Vs The State of Bihar