Patna High Court
Amarnath Manjhi @ Ravinayak @ Ravi Nayak KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court ordered provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent, and stipulated that the bail will be confirmed only if the petitioner is found to have a clean criminal record.
Summary
The petitioner, Amarnath Manjhi, sought anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 75 litres of liquor from a Toto vehicle and a motorcycle. He contended that he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the seized vehicles, and was implicated solely on a confessional statement made by another person, Manjeet, while in police custody, which he argued lacked evidentiary value. The petitioner also relied on the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act, which abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and conditioned the order on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent by the trial court. If any antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if the petitioner is found to have a clean record, the provisional bail will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act where the alleged offender was not in actual possession of the liquor.
- Whether a confessional statement made by a third person in police custody can form the basis for anticipatory bail denial.
- Effect of the 2018 amendment to the Bihar Excise Act on the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- deemed possession
- confessional statement
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19334 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-40 Year-2026 Thana- GAURICHAK District- Patna
======================================================
Amarnath Manjhi @ Ravinayak @ Ravi Nayak Kumar Son of Ramdev
Manjhi R/o - Sapahua, P.S. - Gaurichak, Dist. - Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Tiwari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Surendra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 26-03-2026 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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 75 liters of liquor from a Toto vehicle and a
motorcycle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing
was recovered from his conscious possession and is not the
owner of any of the seized vehicles and came to be implicated
based on confessional statement of Manjeet in police custody
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19334 of 2026(2) dt.26-03-2026
2/3
which does not have any evidentiary value. It is next submitted
that after amendment in the excise act in the year 2018, the
concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been
done away with.
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, 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
Gaurichak P.S. Case No. 40 of 2026 subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court
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
seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this
Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner is a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19334 of 2026(2) dt.26-03-2026
3/3
person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…