Patna High Court
Manish Sao @ Manish KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his criminal antecedents and compliance with conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
The petitioner, Manish Sao, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, where 55,600 litres of liquor and Rs.21,000 were allegedly recovered from a public garbage heap. He contended that no liquor was found in his possession, the recovery was from a public place, and the charge was based solely on a confessional statement of another accused, which he argued lacks evidentiary value. He further submitted that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender, rendering the charge untenable. The State opposed the bail. The court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.20,000 with two sureties and ordered verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents, stipulating that if more than four prior cases are found, the bail would not be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
- Whether a confessional statement of an accused in police custody can form the basis for implicating another person.
- Effect of the 2018 amendment removing the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender on bail considerations.
- What conditions should be imposed on provisional anticipatory bail, including verification of criminal antecedents.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- deemed possession
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedents
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482(2) CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20139 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-556 Year-2025 Thana- PATLIPUTRA District- Patna
======================================================
Manish Sao @ Manish Kumar Son of Chatrugun Prasad @ Chatugupta
Prasad Resident of Rajapul Mainpura, Ward No.- 22C, P.S.- Patliputra, Patna,
Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Apurv Harsh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Damodar Prasad Tiwary
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-04-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of four cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 55.600 litres of liquor from a heap of
garbage at LCT ghat at Patna along with Rs.21,000/-. It is next
submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such
nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and even
alleged recovery is from a place which does not belong to the
petitioner and is accessible to public at large and he came to be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20139 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
2/3
implicated based on confessional statement of apprehended
accused in police custody 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. It is also submitted
that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise,
the police starts implicating mechanically either through
chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret
information without holding a proper investigation. It is further
submitted that petitioner in similar manner earlier also came to
be implicated in cases relating to excise.
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.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand)
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 Patliputra P.S. Case No.556/2025, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20139 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
3/3
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 more than
four cases, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner
had 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 has antecedent of four
cases, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall
be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.