Patna High Court
Raju ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that provisional anticipatory bail should be granted subject to the conditions prescribed under Section 438(2) CrPC and verification of the petitioners’ antecedent.
Summary
The petitioners, Raju and Jitendra Manjhi, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 110 litres of liquor from a premises adjacent to petitioner 1’s house. They argued that they have clean antecedents, were not caught in possession, and were implicated by a hostile watchman who failed to inform police earlier. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioners be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail‑bonds of Rs 500 each with two sureties, subject to verification of their criminal antecedent by the trial court. If any antecedent is discovered, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional order will be confirmed. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioners’ lack of possession and clean antecedent justify granting anticipatory bail.
- What conditions must be imposed under Section 438(2) of the CrPC for provisional anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
- bail bond
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16280 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-369 Year-2025 Thana- MADHUBAN District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Raju Manjhi S/o Jangali Manjhi Resident of Village- Vishunpur Tara,
Gulwara Madhuban, P.O.- Madhuban, P.S.- Madhuban, District- East
Champaran
2. Jitendra Manjhi S/o Jangali Manjhi Resident of Village- Vishunpur Tara,
Gulwara Madhuban, P.O.- Madhuban, P.S.- Madhuban, District- East
Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pawan Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rajendra Prasad Nat
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the
allegation is of recovery of 110 litres of liquor from a place
behind the house of the petitioner no.1.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from their conscious possession and even alleged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16280 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
2/3
recovery is from a place, which does not belong to the
petitioners, but then, is adjacent to the house of petitioner no.1
and they came to be implicated at the instance of Chaukidar
with whom they are on an inimical term. It is further submitted
that if Chaukidar was aware of the involvement of the
petitioners in the occurrence, then why he did not inform the
police prior to institution of the present F.I.R., which casts an
aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is next submitted that
it appears that the Chaukidar in order to save the real culprit
falsely implicated the petitioners, who are persons with clean
antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners, above-named, in the
event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in
the sum of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) each 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 Madhuban P. S. Case No.369 of 2025, subject
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16280 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
3/3
to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioners shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the event,
if it is found that petitioners have antecedent of even one case,
then it would be presumed that petitioners for the purposes of
obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed their 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 petitioners are persons with clean
antecedent, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…