Sangita DeviversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40919 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-126 Year-2026 Thana- SONBERSA District- Sitamarhi
                 ======================================================
                 Sangita Devi W/o- Raj Kumar Manjhi R/Village - Sonbarsa @ Sonbarsa
                 Lalbandi Mushari Tola P.S.- Sonbarsa District- Sitamarhi

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

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

2   30-06-2026                     Heard Mr. Santosh Kumar, learned counsel for the

                   petitioner and Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal, learned APP for the

                   State.

                                2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since

                   18.05.2026, in connection with Sonbarsa P.S. Case No. 126 of

                   2026, F.I.R. dated 18.05.2026                registered for the offences

                   punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and

                   Excise Act.

                                3. Recovery is of 450.00 litres of Nepali Saufi liquor.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner has clean antecedent 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 nothing has

                   been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40919 of 2026(2) dt.30-06-2026
                                            2/3




          rather recovery has been made from the place of occurrence and

          altogether 450.00 litres of Niepali Saufi liquor was recovered

          from the place of occurrence. It appears from the seizure list that

          the seizure list witnesses are Bihar Home Guard police

          personnel so there is non-compliance of Sections 103 and 105

          of BNSS, 2023              and the petitioner is in custody since

          18.05.2026.

                        5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the

          State has vehemently opposed the prayer for               bail of the

          petitioner.

                        6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case

          and the fact that the petitioner having clean antecedent and

          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       Exclusive Special Excise Court No. 1, Sitamarhi in

          connection with Sonbarsa P.S. Case No. 126 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

          and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40919 of 2026(2) dt.30-06-2026
                                                           3/3




                         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