Patna High Court
Mungia DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to conditions and verification of her antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Mungia Devi, sought anticipatory bail after the police implicated her in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly recovering three litres of liquor from an abandoned hut that she claimed did not belong to her. She argued that she has a clean antecedent, is a woman, and that no liquor was found in her conscious possession. The State opposed the bail, contending that the investigation was sufficient to proceed. The High Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify her criminal antecedent. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would be revoked, but if she remains clean, the bail would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in the context of alleged offences under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of possession of liquor justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the trial court’s verification of the petitioner’s antecedent can affect the provisional anticipatory bail order.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- Bihar Negotiable/Statutory (BNSS) — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a) Bihar Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
- High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32034 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-373 Year-2024 Thana- MAKHDUMPUR District- Jehanabad
======================================================
Mungia Devi W/o - Rajnandan Manjhi R/o Vill. - Dhira Bigha, P.S.
-Makhdumpur(Tehta), Dist. - Jehanabad.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Birendra Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Damodar Prasad Tiwary
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 13-05-2026 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 the
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman and
allegation is of recovery of 3 litres of liquor from an abandoned
hut.
4. 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 even the alleged
recovery is from an abandoned hut, but then petitioner came to
be implicated based on the fact that during the inquiry, it
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32034 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
2/3
transpired that the hut belongs to the petitioner but then it is
asserted and submitted that the hut does not belong to the
petitioner and police in a mechanical manner implicated the
petitioner without holding a proper investigation, when
petitioner admittedly is a person with clean antecedent.
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 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 Makhdumpur (Tehta) P.S. Case No. 373 of
2024, 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 even one case
then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of
seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed her antecedent before this
Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32034 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
3/3
confirmed, but after verification if 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)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.