Patna High Court
Upendra ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions and verification of his antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Upendra Manjhi, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of ten litres of liquor from his joint family house. He argued that he has a clean antecedent, was not arrested at the spot, and that the liquor was not in his conscious possession; moreover, the alleged informant, a watchman, had an inimical relationship with him and failed to report earlier. The State opposed the bail. The Court, considering these 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 antecedent and other conditions under Section 438(2). It further stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed, whereas a clean record would lead to immediate confirmation. The application for anticipatory bail was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act where the alleged liquor is located in a joint family house and the petitioner claims no conscious possession.
- Whether the amendment to the Excise Act, 2018, which abolished the concept of deemed possession, affects the bail application.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and the circumstances of the informant’s report justify granting bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30 Excise Act
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- Section 438 CrPC
- bail bond
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2095 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-146 Year-2025 Thana- KOTWA District- East Champaran
======================================================
Upendra Manjhi S/O Late Janak Manjhi R/O- Jasauli Patti, Koirgawa,
Musaritola, P.S.- Kotwa, Dist- East Champaran at Motihari
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shashank Shekhar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sunil Kumar Pandey
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 27-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is
of recovery of 10 litres of liquor from the house of the
petitioner.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and even the house in
question is a joint family property and thus, it cannot be alleged
with certainty that it was the petitioner, who had kept the liquor
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2095 of 2026(2) dt.27-01-2026
2/3
in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his
knowledge and after Amendment in the Excise Act, 2018, the
concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been
done away with and he came to be implicated at the instance of
Chaukidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is further
submitted that if Chaukidar was aware of the involvement of the
petitioner 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.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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 Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum 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
Kotwa P. S. Case No.146 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid
down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2095 of 2026(2) dt.27-01-2026
3/3
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds 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.
9. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner based on instruction submits that
petitioner undertakes to deposit an amount of Rs.15,00/- with
Lawyers’ Association, Patna High Court, Patna.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…