Shiv Kumari Devi Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Paras Nath For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Madan Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶10

2 23-02-2026

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

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 22 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner and 15 litres of liquor from the straw house of Durga Kumar.

¶14

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 after 2018 amendment in the Excise Act, the concept of deemed possession

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84160 of 2025(2) dt.23-02-2026 2/3

¶16

and presumed offender has been done away with. It is next submitted that the house in 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 knowledge of the petitioner. It is further submitted that she came to be implicated based on secret information which is the easiest way to implicate someone without holding a proper investigation when petitioner admittedly is a person with clean antecedent.

¶17

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

¶18

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 Shahartelpa P.S. Case No. 102 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

¶19

7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84160 of 2025(2) dt.23-02-2026 3/3

¶21

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 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.

¶22

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

¶23

Sumit/-

¶24

U T

Shiv Kumari Devi v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Kumari Devi 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

Kara Ray @ Dinesh Ray @ Kiran Ray @ Dinelsh Ray Vs The State of Bihar

Santosh Kumar @ Kausa Vs The State of Bihar

Chhotu Kumar @ Prakash Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Archana Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Rameshwar Dhangad @ Rameshwar Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

Indradev Kumar Singh @ Indradev Kumar @ Indal Kumar @ Indal Vs The State of Bihar