Sharmila DeviversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32609 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-30 Year-2026 Thana- CHACKMEHSI District- Samastipur
                 ======================================================
                 Sharmila Devi W/o Santosh Sahni R/o Village - Kalaunjar, P.O and P.S -
                 Chakmehsi, District - Samastipur

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Abhigyan Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   13-05-2026                      Heard Mr. Abhigyan Kumar, learned counsel for

                   the petitioner and Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Singh, learned APP for

                   the State.

                                2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since

                   02.03.2026, in connection with Chakmehsi P.S. Case No. 30 of

                   2026, F.I.R. dated 01.03.2026               registered for the offences

                   punishable under Sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition &

                   Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

                                3. Recovery is of 30 litres of country made liquor.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is innocent and she has been falsely implicated in the

                   present case. He further submits that it appears from the F.I.R.

                   as well as seizure list that recovery has been made from the

                   house in question and petitioner is not the absolute owner of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32609 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
                                            2/3




          house in question and she has been made accused merely on the

          ground that she is wife of co-accused person, namely, Santosh

          Sahni. He further submits that the petitioner is not the absolute

          owner of the house in question and there is non-compliance of

          Sections 103 and 105 of BNSS, 2023 and the petitioner is in

          custody since 02.03.2026.

                       5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the

          State has vehemently opposed the prayer for              bail of the

          petitioner and submits that the petitioner carries three more

          cases of similar nature other than the present one but fairly

          submits on the basis of paragraph-3 of the bail petition that the

          petitioner is on bail in the pending matters.

                       6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case

          and the fact that there is non-compliance of Sections 103 and

          105 of the BNSS, 2023, let the petitioner, above named, be

          released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees

          Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the

          satisfaction of learned Special Judge Excise-I, Samastipur in

          connection with Chakmehsi P.S. Case No. 30 of 2026, subject

          to the following conditions :-

                       (1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be

          properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32609 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
                                                           3/3




                         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.

                                      (2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the

                         witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move

                         for cancellation of bail.

                                      (3) 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 antecedents, 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)
Ibrar//-

U          T