Patna High Court
Manisha Devi @ Manisha KumariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail to Manisha Devi subject to conditions and allowed the withdrawal of the anticipatory bail application for Mithun Sahni.
Summary
Manisha Devi and Mithun Sahni filed an anticipatory bail application in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act concerning the alleged recovery of 160 litres of liquor from a joint family house. Mithun Sahni was arrested while the application was pending, and his counsel sought to withdraw his anticipatory bail, which the court permitted, dismissing his application as withdrawn. Manisha Devi, a woman with a clean antecedent, argued that she was not in actual possession of the liquor and that the amended Excise Act no longer recognizes deemed possession or presumed offender. The State opposed her bail. The court granted her provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties, subject to verification of her criminal antecedent by the trial court; if any antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed, otherwise it will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to Manisha Devi under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the anticipatory bail application for Mithun Sahni can be withdrawn after his arrest.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- provisional bail
- withdrawal of bail application
- joint family property
- deemed possession
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28142 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2026 Thana- Chitragupta Nagar District- Khagaria
======================================================
1. Manisha Devi @ Manisha Kumari W/O Late Sunil Sahni R/O Vill.-
Sanhauli, Durgasthan, Power House, Ward no. 24, P.S.- Chitragupta Nagar,
Dist.- Khagaria.
2. Mithun Sahni W/O Late Ashok Sahni R/O Vill.- Sanhauli, Durgasthan,
Power House, Ward no. 24, P.S.- Chitragupta Nagar, Dist.- Khagaria.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sudhir Kumar Sinha
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Lakshmi Kant Sharma
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 28-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks
permission to withdraw the anticipatory bail application with
respect to petitioner No. 2 (Mithun Sahni), who was arrested
during pendency of the instant anticipatory bail application.
3. Permission is accorded.
4. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is
dismissed as withdrawn with respect to petitioner No. 2 (Mithun
Sahni).
5. The petitioner No. 1 apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28142 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
2/3
Bihar Excise Act.
6. 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 160 litres of liquor from the house of
the petitioner.
7. 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 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 next submitted that 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 people, but
then the name of the person, who disclosed the name of the
petitioner, is not disclosed in the FIR, which casts an aspersion
on the case of the prosecution, when petitioner has not been
implicated based on secret information.
8. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
9. Considering the submissions made by the learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28142 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
3/3
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner No. 1 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 Khagaria (Chitragupta Nagar) P.S. Case No. 33
of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
482(2) of the BNSS.
10. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court
shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner No. 1 and in
the event if it is found that petitioner No. 1 has antecedent of even
one case then it would be presumed that petitioner No. 1, 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 No. 1 is a person with clean antecedent in
that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…