Patna High Court
Soni DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ALOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to monetary and procedural conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Soni Devi, was arrested in connection with a police raid that uncovered alleged violations of Section 61(2) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Sections 3 to 8 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act. She contended that she was falsely implicated, that no incriminating material was found on her, and that procedural requirements under Sections 303 and 105 of the B.N.S. were not complied with. The State opposed bail, arguing that she is named in the FIR. The Court noted the petitioner’s gender, the length of her pre‑trial detention, the lack of direct evidence against her, and the fact that a co‑accused in an identical case had been granted bail. Considering these factors, the Court ordered her release on bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, subject to standard conditions for bail.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite being named in the FIR under the B.N.S. and ITPA.
- Whether non‑compliance with procedural provisions of Sections 303 and 105 of the B.N.S. warrants bail.
- Whether the prior criminal antecedents of the petitioner affect the bail decision.
- Whether parity with a co‑accused who was granted bail in a similar case mandates bail for the petitioner.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 105, 303, 61(2)
- Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act — s. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- procedural lapse
- gender considerations
- parity
- criminal procedure
- immoral traffic
- narcotic law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89563 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-154 Year-2025 Thana- BALIYA District- Begusarai
======================================================
Soni Devi W/o Late Ajay Khalifa @ Late K. B. Khalifa Resident of Village -
Mathurapur, Ward No. 6, P.S - Ballia, District – Begusarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Amar Kumar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Madhuri Lata
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 13-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Ballia
P.S. Case No. 154/2025 registered for the offences punishable
under Section 61(2) of the B.N.S. and 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 of Immoral
Traffic (Prevention) Act.
3. As per prosecution case, on the basis of secret
informant, the informant along with other police officials
conducted a raid near Dandari Dhala at Mathurapur. It is alleged
that some persons started fleeing away to see the police force
during which some persons succeeded to flee away and some
persons apprehended on the spot. It is further alleged that accused
persons were indulged in Immoral Traffic Act and some
incriminating materials were recovered from the place of
occurrence.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89563 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence as
alleged in the FIR and he has falsely been implicated in this case
on the basis of suspicion. Except suspicion, there is nothing on
record to demonstrate the complicity of the present petitioner with
the alleged occurrence. The petitioner is a lady. He further submits
that there is no compliance of Sections 303 and 105 of B.N.S.S.
The petitioner is languishing in custody since 14.09.2025 and
bears three criminal antecedents in which she is acquitted in two
cases and she is on bail in one case. The petitioner is not
apprehended on the spot and no incriminating article has been
recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Seizure
list has not been prepared as per law. He orally submits that charge
sheet has been submitted in this case and there is no likelihood of
tampering with the prosecution evidence. On similar and identical
allegation co-accused Manno Devi @ Mano Devi has already been
granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide Cr. Misc.
No.82360/2025 and on the principle of parity the petitioner also
deserves same treatment.
5. The learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes
the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner
is FIR named accused and she cannot escape from the allegation
made in the FIR.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89563 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
3/3
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,
period of custody, petitioner is a lady, on similar and identical
allegation co-accused has already been granted bail and argument
advanced on behalf of both sides and also taking into
consideration the material available on record, let the petitioner
above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.
10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate-Begusarai in connection with Ballia P.S. Case No.
154/2025, subject to following conditions:-
(i) One of the bailors shall be either father or mother or
sister or brother or wife or the person who has sworn the affidavit
in bail application.
(ii) Petitioner will co-operate in trial and will remain
present on all dates and absence for two consecutive dates without
appropriate permission, would be a ground for cancellation of bail
by the learned Trial court itself.
(iii) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
(Alok Kumar Pandey, J)
amitkumar/-
U T
Checking your session…