Mundrika Sahani @ Bhuta Sahani @ Mundrika Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58481 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-507 Year-2024 Thana- HARSIDHI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Mundrika Sahani @ Bhuta Sahani @ Mundrika Chaudhary Son of Late Raj Govind Sahani @ Late Raja Govind Sahani Resident of Village - Bairiya Dih, P.S.- Harsidhi, District - East Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ranjana Srivastava, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 19-11-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 8 litres of liquor from the house of Indu Devi, 3 litres, 4 litres and 5 litres of liquor from possession of Ashok Chaudhary, Harilal Singh and Sunil Thakur.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and being the husband of Indu Devi, he came to be implicated. It is further submitted

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58481 of 2025(3) dt.19-11-2025 2/3 that the house in question is a joint family property, as such, it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was the petitioner who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his knowledge and his wife was made to confess the name of the petitioner in police custody which does not have any evidentiary value in the eye of law.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court 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 Harsidhi P.S. Case No. 507 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his antecedent

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58481 of 2025(3) dt.19-11-2025 3/3 before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T