Patna High Court
Jagrita DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner subject to a bond and conditions.
Summary
Jagrita Devi was arrested on 3 March 2026 in connection with a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018 for allegedly possessing 2.5 litres of country‑made liquor seized from a canal bank near her house. She contended that the liquor was not in her conscious possession and that the investigation violated Sections 103 and 105 of the BNSS, seeking bail on the ground of innocence. The prosecution opposed bail, highlighting four prior criminal cases of a similar nature, though she was already on bail for those matters. The court examined the factual matrix, the alleged procedural lapses, and the relevance of her antecedents, and decided to grant bail subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and specific conditions. The order also directed the lower court to verify her criminal antecedents and to cancel bail if any concealment is discovered.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018 given the alleged non‑possession of the seized liquor.
- Whether the alleged non‑compliance of Sections 103 and 105 of the BNSS warrants denial of bail.
- Whether the accused's prior criminal antecedents of a similar nature affect the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 103, 105
Subjects
- bail
- prohibition law
- excise
- contraband liquor
- prior criminal antecedents
- procedural lapse
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23728 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-29 Year-2026 Thana- SIKRAUL District- Buxar
======================================================
Jagrita Devi Wife of Pappru Bin @ Pappu Bind Resident of Village- Tetarahar
Bind Toli, P.S.- Sikraul, District- Buxar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manish Rai Sharma, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-04-2026 Heard Mr. Manish Rai Sharma, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
03.03.2026 in connection with Sikraul P.S. Case No. 29 of 2026,
F.I.R. dated 03.03.2026 for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.
3. Recovery is of 2.5 liters of country made liquor.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and she has falsely been implicated in the
present case. He further submits that it appears from the F.I.R.
as well as seizure list that nothing has been recovered from the
conscious possession of the petitioner rather the recovery has
been made from bank of a canal in front of the house of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23728 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
2/3
petitioner and there is non-compliance of Section 103 and 105
of BNSS and the petitioner is in custody since 03.03.2026.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that petitioner carries four criminal antecedents other
than the present one of similar nature but fairly submits on the
basis of paragraph-3 of the bail application that the petitioner is
on bail in the said matters.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive
Excise Special Court No.2, Buxar in connection with Sikraul
P.S. Case No. 29 of 2026, subject to the following conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23728 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
3/3
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed her
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…