Patna High Court
Vijanti Devi @ Bijanti DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of her criminal antecedent and compliance with the conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
Vijanti Devi, the wife of Mahavir Manjhi, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act concerning the alleged recovery of 280 litres of liquor from her Scorpio vehicle. She argued that the liquor was not in her conscious possession and that she was implicated merely as the vehicle owner, with her son Deepak allegedly misusing the vehicle. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, requiring a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and conditioning confirmation on verification of her criminal antecedents. If she is found to have more than one prior case, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one prior case, it will be confirmed. The order is subject to the provisions of Section 482(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the ownership of the vehicle, without conscious possession of the liquor, suffices to deny anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30
- Section 482
- liquor seizure
- vehicle ownership
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1849 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-805 Year-2025 Thana- DIGHA District- Patna
======================================================
Vijanti Devi @ Bijanti Devi Wife of Mahavir Manjhi @ Mahaveer Manjhi
Mohalla -Banglapar, Ward No. 14, Police Station -Bihta, District -Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Aryan Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madan Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 22-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and is a woman and
allegation is of recovery of 280 liters of liquor from a Scorpio
vehicle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended 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 the seized
vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1849 of 2026(2) dt.22-01-2026
2/3
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 son, Deepak, would misuse the vehicle in the manner as
alleged who was also apprehended from the spot.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. 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
Provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.
5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) 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 Digha
P.S. Case No. 805 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
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 more
than one case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed her
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1849 of 2026(2) dt.22-01-2026
3/3
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one
case only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…