Patna High Court
Prem Kumar Manjhi @ Prem Kumar RamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Prem Kumar Manjhi, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of 10 litres of liquor from a premises adjacent to his house. He contended that the FIR was filed on the basis of a hostile watchman’s complaint, that he was not arrested on the spot, and that the alleged liquor was not in his conscious possession. The petitioner also argued that the order mistakenly recorded ten prior excise cases against him, whereas he had only one antecedent case. The State opposed the grant of anticipatory bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent, and clarified that the bail would be confirmed only if the antecedent is limited to one case.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act where the petitioner claims the alleged offence occurred on premises not belonging to him.
- Whether the alleged concealment of prior criminal antecedents affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the circumstances of the FIR, including the role of a hostile watchman, warrant denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30 Excise Act
- Section 438 CrPC
- bail bond
- criminal antecedent
- provisional bail
- excise offence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22449 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-465 Year-2025 Thana- DIGHWARA District- Saran
======================================================
Prem Kumar Manjhi @ Prem Kumar Ram Son of Vishwakarma Manjhi @
Vishwakarma Ram R/o Village - Shitalpur Pirganj, P.S. - Dighwara, Dist. -
Saran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Nalin Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Kumar Ranjit Ranjan
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-04-2026 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 has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act,
but then, the order impugned inadvertently records that
petitioner has antecedent of ten cases and allegation is of
recovery of 10 litres of liquor from a place behind 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22449 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
2/3
recovered from his conscious possession and even alleged
recovery is from a place, which does not belong to the petitioner
but then, is adjacent to his house 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 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.
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.5,000/- (Rupees Five 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 Dighwara P. S. Case No.465 of 2025, subject 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22449 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
3/3
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 more than 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 has antecedent of one case only, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…