Patna High Court
Sanjay ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail with conditions, pending verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Sanjay Manjhi, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, alleging that 40 litres of liquor were recovered from a location adjacent to his house and not from his possession. He argued that he has only one prior case under the Excise Act and that the chaukidar, who is on bad terms with him, failed to inform the police earlier, casting doubt on the prosecution's case. The State opposed the grant of anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.5,000 and two sureties, invoking Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. The order also conditioned the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, with confirmation of bail dependent on whether he has more than one prior case.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in the context of the alleged offence under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether the alleged recovery of liquor from a location not in the petitioner’s possession justifies denial of bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30
- excise offence
- liquor seizure
- Cr.P.C. 438
- B.N.S.S. 482
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23433 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-98 Year-2026 Thana- PARSA District- Saran
======================================================
Sanjay Manjhi Son of Late Supan Manjhi R/o Village - Bankerwa, P.S.- Parsa,
District - Saran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravi Prakash, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Harendra Prasad, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 09-04-2026 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 the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 40 litres of liquor from a place
behind the house of the petitioner.
4. 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 alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
but then is adjacent to his house. It is further submitted that
petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23433 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
2/3
Chawkidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is next
submitted that if the Chawkidar was aware of the involvement
of the petitioner in the occurrence then why he did not inform
the police prior to the institution of the instant FIR which casts
an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.
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.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 Parsa P.S. Case No.
98 of 2026, 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 one
case, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23433 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
3/3
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 one case in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…