Patna High Court

Jaikali Devi @ Jaykal DeviversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 15 April 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The court held that provisional anticipatory bail may be granted subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedents and compliance with the stipulated conditions.

Summary

The petitioner, Jaikali Devi, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged recovery of large quantities of liquor from premises not belonging to her. She contended that she has a clean antecedent, is a woman, and was falsely implicated by a chowkidar to pressure her husband. The State opposed her request for anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that she furnish a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and that the trial court verify her criminal antecedents. If any antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if she is found to have a clean record, the bail will be confirmed forthwith.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
Whether the petitioner’s alleged lack of possession and clean antecedent justify the grant of bail.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
liquor seizure
false implication
clean antecedent
bail conditions

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7441 of 2026
                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-227 Year-2025 Thana- Gadhiya Bazar District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Jaikali Devi @ Jaykal Devi w/o Babulal Manjhi R/o Village - Koilaraha,
                 Ward No. 08, P.S - Garahiya Bazar, District - East Champaran

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Ms. Usha Kumari
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Md. Nazir Ansari
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   15-04-2026                  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.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman and

                   allegation is of recovery of 130 litres of liquor from a place

                   behind the house of Ranjit Manjhi and 107.5 litres of liquor

                   from courtyard of Sitaram Manjhi. It is next submitted that

                   petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was

                   recovered from her conscious possession and even alleged

                   recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner

                   and she came to be implicated at the instance of chowkidar with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7441 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
                                            2/3




          whom her husband Babulal Manjhi is on an inimical term. It is

          also submitted that chowkidar falsely implicated the petitioner

          with a view to coerce her husband into submission.

                       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 within a period of six weeks

          from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on

          furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred) 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 Garahiya Bazar P.S. Case No.227/2025, 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 even one

          case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had

          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 is a person with clean
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7441 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
                                                         3/3




                       antecedent, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order

                       shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                 (Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-

U        T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…