Badhiya Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28017 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-474 Year-2025 Thana- MASAUDHI District- Patna ====================================================== Badhiya Devi W/O Late Raju Manjhi R/V- Gurptichak, PS- Masaurhi, DistPatna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms.Eashita Raj For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nityanand ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 28-04-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of her arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 45 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from her conscious possession and even the house in question is a joint family property and thus, it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was the petitioner, who had kept the liquor

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28017 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026 2/3 in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within her knowledge and after Amendment in the Excise Act, 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away with and she came to be implicated at the instance of local person, but the name of the person, who disclosed the name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the F.I.R., which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is also submitted that it absolutely does not stand to reason that how local person would know who had concealed the liquor in the house.

5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail application.

6. 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, is directed to be released on provisional anticipatory bail on her furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.5,000/- (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 Masaurhi P. S. Case No.474 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

7. The application stands allowed.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28017 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026 3/3

8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one case, then it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court, in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one case only, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T