Mangni Devi @ Mangani Devi @ Premshila DeviversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44563 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-96 Year-2026 Thana- Manuapul District- West Champaran
                 ======================================================
           1.     Mangni Devi @ Mangani Devi @ Premshila Devi W/O Vinod Chaudhari
                  Resident of village- Patarakha, PS- Manuapul, Distt.- West Champaran
           2.     Shambhu Manjhi S/O Viyaf Manjhi Resident of village- Patarakha, PS-
                  Manuapul, Distt.- West Champaran
                                                                       ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                  Versus
                 The State of Bihar Patna
                                                                ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Niraj Kumar Sharma
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Pradeep Narain Kumar
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   09-07-2026               1.    Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and

                   learned A.P.P. for the State.

                             2.    The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case

                   registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.    In view of the submission made by learned counsel

                   for the petitioners, the defect as pointed out by the office is

                   hereby ignored.

                             4.    Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

                   petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of two cases under the Excise

                   Act and is a woman and petitioner no. 2 is a person with clean

                   antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 21 litres of liquor

                   from the house of petitioner no. 2 and 6 litres of liquor from a

                   place behind the house of petitioner no. 1.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44563 of 2026(2) dt.09-07-2026
                                            2/3




                   5.     Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

          petitioners were not arrested from the spot as such nothing was

          recovered from their conscious possession and even the alleged

          recovery of 6 litres of liquor is from a place which does not

          belong to the petitioner no. 1 but then is adjacent to her house

          and as far as 21 litres of liquor is alleged to have been from the

          house of petitioner no. 2, it is submitted that the house in

          question is a joint family property as such it cannot be alleged

          with certainty that it was petitioner no. 2 who had kept the

          liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his

          knowledge. It is next submitted that after amendment in the

          Excise Act in the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession

          and presumed offender has been done away with and they came

          to be implicated at the instance of Chowkidar with whom they

          are on an inimical term.

                   6.     Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

          anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

                   7.     Considering the submissions made by the learned

          counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the

          event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks

          from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on

          furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44563 of 2026(2) dt.09-07-2026
                                                          3/3




                        each 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 Manuapul P.S. Case No. 96 of 2026

                        subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of

                        the BNSS.

                                 8.     It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court

                        shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the

                        event if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of more

                        than two cases and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of even one

                        case then it would be presumed that petitioners, for the purposes

                        of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed their antecedent before

                        this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not

                        be confirmed with respect to that petitioner who had concealed his

                        criminal antecedent before this Court, but after verification if it is

                        found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of two cases and

                        petitioner no. 2 is a person with clean antecedent in that event

                        the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed

                        forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T