Sugadhani Devi v. The State of Bihar
Case at a glance
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Provisions considered
- Bihar Excise Act s. 30(a)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 438(2)
Judgment
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : For the Opposite Party/s : ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA Mr.Sanjay Sharma Mr.Ram Priya Sharan Singh ORAL ORDER 2 23-07-2024
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 Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
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 15 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner.
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 the amendment in the Excise Act in the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away with. It is next submitted that the house in question is a joint family property as such Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48540 of 2024(2) dt.23-07-2024 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 within knowledge of the petitioner.
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, the petitioner above-named, in the event of her arrest or surrender before the learned trial court 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 trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Atri P.S. Case No. 55 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
It is made clear that the learned trial court before accepting the bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the event if it is found that the petitioner has antecedent of even one case, in that event the present anticipatory bail order shall not be given effect to. SUMIT/- U T (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.