Patna High Court
Manish Kumar Jaiswal @ Manish Kumar AgarwalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court provisionally granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner with specified bond, sureties and conditions, pending verification of his criminal antecedent.
Summary
Manish Kumar Jaiswal sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018, alleging recovery of 2,025 litres of liquor from a truck. He argued that he was not in possession of the liquor, was not arrested on the spot, and was implicated solely on a confessional statement of another person, contending that the 2018 amendment abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail, citing his prior four excise cases. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.20,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., directing the trial court to verify his criminal antecedent. If more than four prior cases are found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only four, it will be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018
- Whether the confessional statement of a co-accused can alone justify denial of bail
- Effect of the 2018 amendment on the doctrines of deemed possession and presumed offender
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- Section 30(a)
- deemed possession
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedent
- bond and sureties
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29738 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-289 Year-2021 Thana- PHULPARAS District- Madhubani
======================================================
Manish Kumar Jaiswal @ Manish Kumar Agarwal S/o Arun Kumar Jaiswal
@ Arun Kumar Chaudhary R/o Village - Raghopur, Simrahi Ward No. 12, P.S
- Raghopur Simrahi Ward No.-12, District - Supaul
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 05-05-2026 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, 2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of four cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 2025 litres of liquor from a truck.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted
that petitioner is not the owner of the seized vehicle and came to
be implicated based on the confessional statement of Ajay
Kumar in police custody which does not have any evidentiary
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29738 of 2026(2) dt.05-05-2026
2/3
value in the eye of law. 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. It is also submitted that once an accused is implicated in a
case relating to excise the police start implicating mechanically
either at the instance of the Chawkidar, local person,
confessional statement or secret information without holding a
proper investigation of the case.
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.20,000/-
(Rupees Twenty Thousand) 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 Phulparas P.S.
Case No. 289 of 2021, G.R. No. 1302 of 2021, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the
Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29738 of 2026(2) dt.05-05-2026
3/3
Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner
and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than four
cases, 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 has antecedent of only four cases in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…