Patna High Court
Manoranjan Kumar Singh @ FauziversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to bond, sureties and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
Manoranjan Kumar Singh sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case involving offences under the IPC (sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120(B), 34) and the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act (sections 30(a), 32, 41). He argued that he was not caught in possession of liquor, was not the owner of the seized vehicle, and that the prosecution’s case relied on a confessional statement of another accused, which he claimed lacks evidentiary value, especially after the 2018 amendment that 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 bond of Rs.25,000, two sureties of equal amount, and conditions under Sec. 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Sec. 482(2) B.N.S.S., with a further direction that the trial court verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent before confirming the bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the petitioner is alleged to have participated in excise offences and has prior criminal antecedents.
- Whether a confessional statement of a co‑accused can be the basis for denying anticipatory bail.
- Effect of the 2018 amendment removing deemed possession and presumed offender on the bail application.
- Whether the number of prior cases (more than five) influences the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120(B), 34, 420, 467, 468, 471
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- deemed possession
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedent
- IPC offences
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19587 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-114 Year-2023 Thana- KEWATI District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Manoranjan Kumar Singh @ Fauzi Son of Indra Mohan Singh Resident of
Village- Rajputana Tole, Jaynagar, P.S.- Jaynagar, Dist.- Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bhavesh Kumar Sah, Advocate
Ms. Archna Aanand, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pradeep Narain Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 10-04-2026 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 Sections 420, 467,
468, 471, 120(B) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as
Sections 30(a), 32 and 41 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise
Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of five cases out of which four cases
are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of
4484.25 litres of liquor from a truck.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19587 of 2026(2) dt.10-04-2026
2/3
that petitioner is not the owner of the seized vehicle and came to
be implicated based on the confessional statement of
apprehended accused, namely, Ram Kumar Yadav in police
custody which does not have any evidentiary value in the eye of
law. 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. It is also submitted
that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise the
police start implicating mechanically either at the instance of the
Chawkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret
information without holding a proper investigation of the case.
It is lastly submitted that petitioner in similar manner earlier
also came to be implicated in cases relating to excise.
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 appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let 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.25,000/-
(Rupees Twenty-five Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19587 of 2026(2) dt.10-04-2026
3/3
the case is pending/Successor Court in connection with Keoti
P.S. Case No. 114 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid
down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. However, 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 more than five
cases, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent 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 has antecedent of only five cases in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…