Patna High Court
Rakesh ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to provisional anticipatory bail subject to conditions, pending verification of his antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Rakesh Manjhi, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for allegedly possessing 52 litres of liquor recovered from a straw house. He argued that he has a clean antecedent, the liquor was not in his immediate possession, and the recovery was orchestrated by a hostile local individual. The State opposed the bail. The Court considered the facts, the petitioner’s clean record, and the nature of the alleged offence, and ordered provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of a Rs.500 bail bond with two sureties, subject to verification of his antecedent. The order further stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed immediately. The decision rests on the provisions of Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether the circumstances of recovery of liquor from a straw house and lack of immediate possession justify granting anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean criminal antecedent influences 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(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- straw house
- liquor possession
- Section 438 Cr.P.C.
- Section 482 B.N.S.S.
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24361 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-22 Year-2026 Thana- CHAKIA District- East Champaran
======================================================
Rakesh Manjhi S/o Ramchandra Manjhi Resident of Village- Mushari Tola,
Koyala Belwa, PS- Chakiya, Distt.- East Champaran at Motihari
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhishek Ranjan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 20-04-2026 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 is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 52 litres of liquor from a straw 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 straw house is a
place outside the house and, thus, is accessible to villagers at
large, as such, it is submitted that someone inimical to the
family of the petitioner concealed meager amount of liquor with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24361 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026
2/3
an intent to implicate the entire family members. It is further
submitted that no prudent person would use his own premises
for committing an occurrence and, thus, would create evidence
against himself and, hence, would get implicated. It is next
submitted that petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of
the local person but then the name of the person who disclosed
the name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the FIR which casts
an aspersion on the case of the prosecution, when petitioner has
not been implicated based on the secret information and is a
person with clean antecedent.
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.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 Chakiya P.S. Case
No. 22 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.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24361 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026
3/3
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 even one case,
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 is a person with clean antecedent in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…