Patna High Court
Manoj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail, granting provisional bail subject to conditions and verification of antecedents.
Summary
Manoj Kumar applied for anticipatory bail anticipating arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for allegedly recovering 40.8 litres of liquor from two motorcycles. The petitioner argued he was not in possession of the seized vehicles, the allegation rested on a confessional statement made in police custody, and the recent amendment to the Excise Act had abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail. The Court, considering these submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.5,000 with two sureties, subject to Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and verification of his criminal antecedents. The order stipulated that if more than one antecedent case is found, the bail would not be confirmed; if only one antecedent is found, the provisional bail would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act
- Whether the confessional statement of Subhash made in police custody is admissible for granting bail
- Effect of the amendment to the Excise Act, 2018 removing deemed possession and presumed offender concepts on bail considerations
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- deemed possession
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30788 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-131 Year-2025 Thana- THAKRAHA District- West Champaran
======================================================
Manoj Kumar S/O Pramod Mukhiya R/O Village- Mangalpur, Rakhahi, P.S.-
Sreenagara (Pujaha) Distt.- West Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Khushi Awadh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Nityanand
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 07-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of
recovery of 40.8 litres of liquor from two different motorcycles.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of
any of the seized vehicle and he came to be implicated based on
confessional statement of Subhash in police custody, which does
not have any evidentiary value. It is also submitted that after
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30788 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026
2/3
Amendment in the Excise Act, 2018, the concept of deemed
possession and presumed offender has been done away with.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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 Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five 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 Thakraha P. S. Case No.131 of 2025, subject to the
conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one case, then
it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of
obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before
this Court, in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30788 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026
3/3
order shall not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found
that petitioner has antecedent of one case only, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…