Patna High Court
Ramu ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that anticipatory bail is warranted and granted provisional bail subject to conditions and verification of antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Ramu Manjhi, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of 24 litres of liquor from a public place. The petitioner asserted a clean criminal record and argued that the alleged liquor was recovered from a location not under his control, implicating him only due to a watchman's false testimony. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offence. The Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of his antecedent. The order stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted under Section 438 CrPC to a person accused of an offence under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and the circumstances of alleged recovery justify granting bail.
- Whether the watchman's testimony alone suffices to sustain the FIR and deny bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
- watchman testimony
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24799 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-7 Year-2026 Thana- RAXAUL District- East Champaran
======================================================
Ramu Manjhi S/o Chhotelal Manjhi @ Chhotelal Mahato R/o Village-
Kaudihar, Dhangar Toli, PS- Raxaul, Dist.- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms.Priyanka Kumari
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Mithlesh Kumar Khare
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 20-04-2026 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 is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is
of recovery of 24 litres of liquor from a place near a handpump.
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 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 implicated
at the instance of Chaukidar, but then, it is submitted that if
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24799 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026
2/3
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. It is next submitted that it appears that
the Chaukidar in order to save the real culprit falsely implicated
the petitioner, when admittedly petitioner is a person with clean
antecedent.
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
Raxaul P. S. Case No.07 of 2026, 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
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24799 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026
3/3
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.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…