Patna High Court

Rajesh Manjhi @ Jitendra Manjhi @ JitendraversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 22 April 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

Provisional anticipatory bail was granted subject to bond, sureties, and verification of antecedents.

Summary

The petitioner, Rajesh Manjhi, sought anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly recovering ten litres of liquor from a sack near his house. He argued that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, that the location did not belong to him, and that the complaint was filed by a hostile chowkidar, raising doubts about the prosecution’s case. The State opposed the bail, contending that the allegations warranted detention. The High Court, after considering the petitioner’s clean antecedent and the lack of direct possession, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a modest bond and two sureties, subject to verification of any prior criminal record under Section 482(2) of the CrPC. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would be revoked, otherwise it would be confirmed.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
Whether the circumstances of alleged possession and the complainant’s motive justify denial of bail.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
excise law
possession
clean antecedent
Section 30
Bihar Excise Act

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25716 of 2026
                         Arising Out of PS. Case No.-15 Year-2026 Thana- Sarbahada District- Gaya
                 ======================================================
                 Rajesh Manjhi @ Jitendra Manjhi @ Jitendra S/o Late Sony Manjhi @ Sonu
                 Manjhi R/O Vill.- Saronjhi @ Sarauji, P.s.- Sarbahda, Dist.- Gayaji

                                                                                     ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                         Versus
                 The State of Bihar PATNA

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Sunil Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Rabindra Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   22-04-2026               1.     Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned A.P.P. for the State, Sri Rabindra Kumar.

                             2.     The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

                   registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.     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 a sack in front of the house

                   of the petitioner.

                             4.     Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   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 and he came to be implicated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25716 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
                                            2/3




          at the instance of Chowkidar with whom he is on an inimical

          term. It is next submitted that if Chowkidar was aware about

          the involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence, then why he

          did not inform the police prior to 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 for the petitioner, 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 Sarbahda P.S. Case No. 15 of 2026, subject to

          the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

                   7.     It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court

          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

          seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this

          Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be

          confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner is a
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25716 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
                                                          3/3




                        person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional

                        anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…