Patna High Court
Ramnath Manjhi @ Ramntha MnjhiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail is appropriate and granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent and compliance with Section 482(2) conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Ramnath Manjhi, sought anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act alleging recovery of liquor from his residence, which is a joint family property. He argued he had no prior criminal record, the liquor was not in his conscious possession, and the complaint was motivated by an inimical watchman. The State opposed the bail, contending the alleged possession justified arrest. The High Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of his antecedents and compliance with conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. The order stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act.
- Whether the alleged recovery of liquor from a joint family house constitutes sufficient ground for arrest.
- Whether the concept of deemed possession/presumed offender, abolished by the 2018 amendment, applies to the petitioner.
- What conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. must be satisfied for granting anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- provisional bail
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482(2)
- excise law
- possession
- joint family property
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13471 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-543 Year-2025 Thana- PAHARPUR District- East Champaran
======================================================
Ramnath Manjhi @ Ramntha Mnjhi S/O Dukhi Manjhi R/O Village-
Vishunpur Matiyarwa, P.S- Paharpur, Distt.- East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Roshan Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nand Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 10-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered
for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar
Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 31 litres of liquor from house of the petitioner and 2
litres of liquor from the house of Rinki Devi. It is next
submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such,
nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and the
house in question is a joint family property, as such, it cannot be
alleged with certainty that it was petitioner who had kept the
liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13471 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
2/3
knowledge and after amendment in the Excise Act in the year
2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender
has been done away with and he came to be implicated at the
instance of Chowkidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It
is also submitted that if Chowkidar was aware of the
involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence then why he did
not inform the police prior to institution of the instant FIR,
which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.
4. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bond in the
sum of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge,
Excise Court No.-01, East Champaran, Motihari in connection
with Paharpur P.S. Case No.543 of 2025, subject to the
conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. The application stands allowed.
7. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13471 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
3/3
accepting the provisional bail bond of the petitioner shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
found that petitioner has antecedent of even 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 is a person with clean antecedent, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.