Patna High Court
Sangita 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 criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Sangita Devi Dhani Lal Manjhi, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022, alleging recovery of 14 litres of spirit from her joint‑family house. She argued that the liquor was not in her conscious possession, the house is jointly owned, and she has only one prior criminal case, making arrest unwarranted. The State opposed the bail, contending the offence is non‑bailable and the petitioner’s antecedents warrant custody. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and directed verification of her criminal antecedents. It further held that if more than one prior case is found, the bail would be presumed withdrawn, whereas confirmation of a single antecedent would solidify the bail. The order is subject to compliance with Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. and verification by the trial court.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged possession of liquor in a joint‑family house justifies arrest.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- liquor possession
- joint family property
- criminal antecedent
- Section 482(2)
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.726 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-504 Year-2025 Thana- HARSIDHI District- East Champaran
======================================================
Sangita Devi Dhani Lal Manjhi R/O Village-Mushari Tola ,Ward N-4 ,P.S-
Harsidhi ,District-East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vijay Shankar Shrivastava
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ramchandra Sahni
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and is a woman and
allegation is of recovery of 14 litres of spirit from the house of
the petitioner. It is next submitted that petitioner was not
arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from her
conscious possession and the house in question is a joint family
property as such it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was
petitioner, who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor
kept in the house was within her knowledge and she came to be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.726 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/3
implicated at the instance of chowkidar with whom her husband
is on an inimical term. It is also submitted that if chowkidar was
aware of the involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence
then why he did not inform the police prior to institution of the
instant FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the
prosecution.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of her arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) 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 Harsidhi
P.S. Case No.504/2025, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than
one case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.726 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/3
concealed her antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one
case, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…