Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Saroj DeviversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The court held that the seizure does not prima facie establish the petitioner's possession and, consequently, granted anticipatory bail.

Summary

Saroj Devi was named in an FIR for alleged illegal manufacture and trade of illicit liquor under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, with 30 litres of liquor seized from her hut. The petitioner contended that the liquor was not in her conscious and exclusive possession and that the search violated Section 103(4) of the BNSS because no independent witness was present. The State opposed her request for anticipatory bail. The court examined whether the seizure established possession and whether the search complied with statutory requirements. Finding that the recovery did not prima facie prove her possession and that procedural lapses existed, the court directed that she be released on anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond and sureties, subject to conditions under CrPC Section 438(2) and BNSS Section 482(2).

Issues considered

  • Does the seizure of illicit liquor establish the petitioner's conscious possession for an offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act?
  • Was the search and seizure conducted in compliance with Section 103(4) of the BNSS?
  • Should anticipatory bail be granted to the petitioner?

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • illegal liquor
  • possession
  • search and seizure
  • Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
  • Criminal Procedure Code

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42214 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-299 Year-2026 Thana- BIRAUL District- Darbhanga
                 ======================================================
                 Saroj Devi, W/o Shambhu Paswan, R/o Village - Lohani, P.S - Biraul, District
                 - Darbhanga

                                                                                     ... ... Petitioner
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                          ... ... Opposite Party
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s    :       Mr. Virendra Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s:       Mr. Akbar Ali, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   01-07-2026                           Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

                                2. The accused/petitioner is named in the FIR and

                   apprehending her arrest in connection with Biraul P.S. Case

                   No.299 of 2026 registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar

                   Prohibition and Excise Act.

                                3. Allegation against the petitioner is to engage in

                   illegal trade/manufacturing of illicit liquor, where there is re-

                   covery of 30 litres of IMFL/country-made liquor.

                                4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for

                   the petitioner that the seized liquor was recovered from the

                   hut of the petitioner. It is further submitted that no recovery
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42214 of 2026( 2) dt.01-07-2026
                                            2/3




          has been effected from the conscious and exclusive posses-

          sion of the petitioner, and there is no material on record to

          establish her conscious possession of the alleged illicit liquor.

          It is argued that Section 103(4) of BNSS has not been com-

          plied with qua search of premises, inasmuch as no indepen-

          dent witness was associated with the search and seizure list

          and the seizure witnesses were police personnel themselves.

          It is also submitted that the petitioner was not apprehended

          on the spot. The petitioner has one criminal antecedent of

          similar nature, in which, she is on bail.

                       5. Learned APP opposed the prayer of anticipatory

          bail to the petitioner.

                       6. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by

          taking of note of fact as recovery of illicit liquor prima facie

          not appears to be made from physical possession of this pe-

          titioner, accordingly, the petitioner above-named, in the

          event of her arrest or surrender in the court below within a

          period of four weeks from today, is directed to 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
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42214 of 2026( 2) dt.01-07-2026
                                                        3/3




                      satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Judge-II (Excise

                      Act), Darbhanga in connection with Biraul P.S. Case No.299

                      of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Sec-

                      tion 438(2) of the CrPC/under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.


                                                      (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
    Raushan/-

U       T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.