Patna High Court

Manoj KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 9 March 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his antecedents and compliance with the conditions imposed.

Summary

Manoj Kumar sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2018 for alleged recovery of liquor from a motorcycle and an auto. He argued that he had no prior criminal record, was not in actual possession of the liquor, and was unaware that his vehicle would be used for the alleged offence. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, requiring a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and conditioning the order on verification of the petitioner’s antecedents by the trial court. If any antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise it will be confirmed. The order is subject to the provisions of Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

Issues considered

What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner under the circumstances?
Whether the petitioner’s lack of direct possession and clean antecedent justify anticipatory bail?

Legislation cited

B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
excise law
liquor seizure
clean antecedent
vehicle ownership

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12384 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-43 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Aurangabad
                 ======================================================
                 Manoj Kumar Son of Rajdeo Nonia @ Rajdev Chohan Resident of Village-
                 Bisrampur (Vishrampur), P.S.- Muffasil Aurangabad, District- Aurangabad
                 (Bihar) Pin- 824102

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Pramendra Kumar Singh
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Md. Anzarul Haque Sahara
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   09-03-2026                  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 Sections 30(a) and

                   32(3) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2018.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 27 litres of liquor from a motorcycle and 54.6 litres

                   of liquor from an auto. It is next submitted that petitioner was

                   not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from

                   his conscious possession and is not the owner of the seized

                   motorcycle but he came to be implicated based on the fact that

                   he is owner of the seized auto. It is next submitted that no
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12384 of 2026(2) dt.09-03-2026
                                            2/3




          prudent person would use his own vehicle for committing an

          occurrence and thus would create evidence against himself and

          hence would get implicated. It is also submitted that the

          petitioner was completely unaware that Dev would misuse his

          vehicle in the manner as alleged, who was also apprehended

          from the spot along with Ajeet.

                       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 his 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 Aurangabad Excise P.S. Case No.43/2025,

          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
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12384 of 2026(2) dt.09-03-2026
                                                         3/3




                       concealed his 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

                       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…