Patna High Court
Manoj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent and conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
Manoj Kumar 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 4.68 litres of liquor from a fast‑food shop. He argued that no liquor was seized from his possession and the case relied on a confessional statement made by a co‑accused in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value, and that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act had abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs 500 with two sureties and conditioned the order on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. If any prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if he is found to have a clean record, the provisional bail will be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act where no possession is established and the prosecution relies on a confessional statement of a co‑accused.
- Whether the 2018 amendment removing the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- deemed possession
- confessional statement
- clean antecedent
- Section 482(2)
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28770 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-94 Year-2026 Thana- SULTANGANJ District- Patna
======================================================
Manoj Kumar Son of Shiv Narayan Sao Resident of Sanichara More, Police
Station - Sultanganj, District - Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nityanand
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 29-04-2026 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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 4.680 liters of liquor from Mahi Fast Food shop.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing
was recovered from his conscious possession and even alleged
recovery is from a shop which does not belong to the petitioner
and he came to be implicated based on confessional statement of
Kittu in police custody which does not have any evidentiary
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28770 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
2/3
value. It is next submitted that after amendment in the excise act
in the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and
presumed offender has been done away with.
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 before the learned Trial Court
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
Sultanganj P.S. Case No. 94 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28770 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
3/3
verification if 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)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.