Patna High Court
Puja DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- RITESH KUMAR
Holding
The court denied the petitioner's application for anticipatory bail.
Summary
Puja Devi, the wife of alleged narcotics dealer Akash Dhangar, applied for anticipatory bail after being named by her husband as a participant in the sale of 'smack' and in assaulting police during a raid. The police recovered 6.48 grams of the drug from Akash and recorded his statement implicating Puja Devi. The petitioner argued that no contraband was found on her, that procedural requirements under Section 109 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act were not complied with, and that she was being falsely implicated. The State opposed bail, highlighting her alleged involvement and her status as an accused in two separate Excise Act cases. After reviewing the facts, the court found sufficient grounds to deny anticipatory bail, concluding that the petitioner could not be granted the privilege.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to Puja Devi despite being implicated by her husband in narcotics offences.
- Whether the procedural requirements under Section 109 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act for seizure were complied with.
- Whether prior charges under the Excise Act affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 109, 125, 132, 190, 191(2)
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act — s. 21(b), 8(c)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- NDPS Act
- narcotics
- police raid
- seizure procedure
- excise offences
- bail denial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31728 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-162 Year-2026 Thana- BUDDHACOLONY District- Patna
======================================================
Puja Devi W/O Akash Dhangar R/o- China Kothi (Harijan Colony), P.S-
Budha Colony, Dist- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ghanshyam Tiwary, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RITESH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 17-06-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
the learned APP for the state.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Budha Colony P.S. Case No. 162 of 2026, for allegedly
having committed offence under Sections 8 (C) and 21(b) of the
N.D.P.S. Act and 109, 132, 191(2), 190 and 125 of the B.N.S.
3. As per the prosecution story, which has been lodged
on the basis of the written report submitted by the informant to
the effect that he got an information to the effect that one Akash
Dhangar is selling smack. To verify the authenticity of the said
information, the informant along with police party reached near
the place of occurrence and caught hold of Akash Dhangar. In
the meantime, his family members and other persons came there
taking bricks and stones in their hands and started assaulting the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31728 of 2026(3) dt.17-06-2026
2/4
police personnel. Taking advantage of the same, the accused
Akash Dhangar tried to flee away, but the police personnel
disclosed their identity to the accused persons and when they
did not relent, the informant asked his accomplice Kaniska
Kumar to fire in the air. When Kaniska Kumar fired in the air,
then the mob backed out. In presence of the police personnel,
search of the whole body of Akash Dhangar was made and from
his jeans pocket 54 packets of smack was found. Total 6.48
grams of smack was recovered from him. When the police
personnel asked Akash Dhangar about the persons who are
involved in selling of smack and who are involved in assault
upon the police personnel, he disclosed the name of the
petitioner and some others, who are involved in selling smack
and are also involved in assault upon the police personnel.
4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that the petitioner is a lady and has not
committed any offence. He submits that nothing has been
recovered from the possession of the petitioner and while
preparing the seizure list, the provisions contained under
Section 109 of the BNS has also not been followed. He further
submits that no such occurrence has taken place and the
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case only
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31728 of 2026(3) dt.17-06-2026
3/4
due to the fact that she happens to be the wife of Akash
Dhangar. He further submits that the petitioner has got two
antecedents related to Excise Act, however in both the cases she
is on bail.
5. Per contra, the learned APP for the state
vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that the petitioner has been named by her husband, to be
the person who is involved with him in selling smack and
therefore, she does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.
He further submits that the petitioner is an accused in two other
cases, related to Excise Act.
6. Having heard the rival submissions and after going
through the records, it appears that a raid was conducted with
regard to the recovery and seizure of smack and during the
course of raid one Akash Dhangar was apprehended. The mob
assaulted the police personnel and tried to get released the said
Akash Dhangar. However, Akash Dhangar was apprehended and
he disclosed the name of the petitioner and some others as the
persons who are involved in selling smack. Further the
petitioner is an accused in two cases related to Excise Act.
7. Considering the above facts and circumstances,
this court is not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31728 of 2026(3) dt.17-06-2026
4/4
bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory
bail application of the petitioner is hereby rejected.
(Ritesh Kumar, J)
Krishnakant/
Kunal
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.