Patna High Court

Manjay Kumar Ray @ Manjay KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 30 April 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

Provisional anticipatory bail was granted subject to conditions, pending verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.

Summary

Manjay Kumar Ray sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act concerning the alleged recovery of 112.14 litres of liquor from the premises of Rajendra Chaudhary. The petitioner argued he had no direct involvement, no possession of the liquor, and a clean criminal record, while the FIR did not disclose the informant’s identity. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the petitioner's clean antecedent and lack of direct connection to the alleged offence, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.500 bond, two sureties, and verification of antecedents by the trial court. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would be withdrawn, otherwise it would be confirmed.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 petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of direct involvement justify granting anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Bihar Excise Act
Section 30(a)
Section 482(2)
clean antecedent
liquor seizure
high court order

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28975 of 2026
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-38 Year-2026 Thana- Excise Thana Hajipur District- Vaishali
                 ======================================================
                 Manjay Kumar Ray @ Manjay Kumar S/o Ayodhya Ray @ Jodhi Ray R/o
                 vill - Kataroo Fatehpur, P.S.- Belsar, Distt.- Vaishali

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :         Mr. Sabal Kumar Jha
                 For the Opposite Party/s :         Mr. Braj Kishore Pd.(App)
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   30-04-2026                  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 112.14 liters of liquor from backside of the house of

                   Rajendra Chaudhary.

                                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 place which does not belong to the petitioner

                   and he has no concern or relation with Rajendra and he came to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28975 of 2026(2) dt.30-04-2026
                                            2/3




          be implicated at the instance of 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

          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 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 Hajipur

          Excise P.S. Case No. 38 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
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28975 of 2026(2) dt.30-04-2026
                                                        3/3




                      confirmed, but after 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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…