Patna High Court
Manju DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to a bail bond, sureties and verification of her antecedent.
Summary
Manju Devi applied for anticipatory bail after a case was registered against her under Sections 30(a) and 30(d) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act for allegedly possessing 10 litres of liquor and 60 litres of Jawa Mahua. She argued that she has a clean antecedent, is a woman, and that the alleged liquor was found in a joint family house, not in her conscious possession, and that the FIR does not name her. The counsel highlighted that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act abolished the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender, making the prosecution’s case weaker. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and verification of her antecedent, directing that the order be confirmed if she is found to have no prior cases.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case under Sections 30(a) and 30(d) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act.
- Whether the petitioner can be treated as a presumed offender under the concept of deemed possession after the 2018 amendment.
- Whether the absence of arrest at the spot and the joint family nature of the property affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- deemed possession
- presumed offender
- joint family property
- clean antecedent
- bail bond
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13736 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-10 Year-2026 Thana- Panchanpur District- Gaya
======================================================
Manju Devi W/O Late Suryadeo Chaudhary R/O Village -Panchanpur P.S.-
Panchanpur Dist- Gaya ji
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pushp Raj Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case registered
for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) and 30(d) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman and
allegation is of recovery of 10 litres of liquor along with 60
litres of Jawa Mahua from house of the petitioner. It is next
submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such,
nothing was recovered from her conscious possession and 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 her
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13736 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
2/3
knowledge and after amendment in the Excise Act in the year
2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender
has been done away with and she came to be implicated at the
instance of local person but then name of the petitioner, who
disclosed the name of the petitioner, is not disclosed in the FIR,
which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution moreso
when petitioner has not been implicated based on secret
information and is a person with clean antecedent.
4. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
5. 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-bond in the
sum of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court of
Exclusive Special Judge Excise-2, Gaya Ji in connection with
Panchanpur P.S. Case No.10 of 2026, subject to the conditions
laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. The application stands allowed.
7. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13736 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
3/3
accepting the provisional bail bond of the petitioner 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 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)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.