Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Jairam ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The Court granted bail to the petitioner, subject to a bond and specified conditions.

Summary

Jairam Manjhi was arrested on 4 April 2026 under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition & Excise Act for allegedly possessing 25 litres of country‑made liquor seized in a joint possession. He filed a bail petition claiming a clean antecedent, false implication, and that the seizure list, prepared by police personnel, violated Sections 103 and 105 of the BNSS, 2023. The State opposed the bail. The Court, noting the petitioner’s clean record and the procedural non‑compliance, ordered his release on bail upon furnishing a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties and imposed conditions regarding cooperation, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of antecedents. The bail bond was to be accepted without delay for verification. The order was pronounced by Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma.

Issues considered

  • What is the applicability of Sections 103 and 105 of the BNSS, 2023 to the seizure process?
  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail given the nature of the offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition & Excise Act and his alleged clean antecedent.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • excise
  • prohibition
  • Section 30(a)
  • BNSS 2023
  • procedural compliance
  • clean antecedent
  • false implication

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30483 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-81 Year-2026 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Saran
                 ======================================================
                 Jairam Manjhi S/O Late Khedan Manjhi R/O Village- Meera Musehari, P.S -
                 Muffasil, District - Saran.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :         Mr. Hemant Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :         Mr. Arun Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   05-05-2026                    Heard Mr. Hemant Kumar, learned counsel for the

                   petitioner and Mr. Arun Kumar, learned APP for the State.

                                2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since

                   04.04.2026, in connection with Sadar Excise P.S. Case No. 81 of

                   2026, F.I.R. dated 04.04.2026                  registered for the offences

                   punishable under           Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition &

                   Excise Act.

                                3. Recovery is of 25.00 litres of country made liquor.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely

                   implicated in the present case.                 He further submits that it

                   appears from the F.I.R. as well as seizure list that altogether

                   25.00 litres of country made liquor was recovered from the joint

                   possession of the petitioner. It appears fom the seizure list that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30483 of 2026(2) dt.05-05-2026
                                            2/3




          the seizure list witnesses are police personnel so there is non-

          compliance of Sections 103 and 105 of BNSS, 2023 and the

          petitioner is in custody since 04.04.2026.

                        5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the

          State has vehemently opposed the prayer for               bail of the

          petitioner.

                        6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case

          and the fact that the petitioner having clean antecedent and

          there is non-compliance of Sections 103 and 105 of the BNSS,

          2023, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on

          furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)

          with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of

          learned       03rd Exclusive Special Excise Court, Saran at

          Chapra in connection with Sadar Excise P.S. Case No. 81 of

          2026, subject to the following conditions :-

                        (1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be

          properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court

          and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and

          on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient

          reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

                        (2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the

          witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30483 of 2026(2) dt.05-05-2026
                                                           3/3




                         for cancellation of bail.

                                      (3) And, further condition that the court below shall

                         verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at

                         any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his

                         criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for

                         cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner.             However, the

                         acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order

                         shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of

                         verification.



                                                                       (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ibrar//-

U          T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.