Manish Kumar @ JackyversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31478 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-87 Year-2026 Thana- MEHANDIGANJ District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Manish Kumar @ Jacky Son of Harinath Mahto R/o- Maheshpur, P.S.-
                 Mehandiganj, Dist.- Patna.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Ms. Rushali, Advocate
                                          :      Mr. Adarsh Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Rajesh Kumar, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   08-05-2026                    Heard Ms. Rushali, learned counsel for the petitioner

                   and Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for

                   the State.

                                2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since

                   30.03.2026 in connection with Mehandiganj Excise P.S. Case

                   No. 87 of 2026 for the offence punishable under Sections 30(a)

                   and 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act.

                                3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the

                   allegation against the petitioner is of recovery of 615.24 liters of

                   foreign liquor and 1908 liters of beer from Samudayik Bhawan.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it

                   appears from the FIR and seizure list that recovery has been

                   made from the Samudayik Bhawan and the petitioner has been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31478 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026
                                            2/3




          made an accused in the present case merely on the basis of

          secret information and except the aforesaid nothing has come to

          suggest the involvement of the petitioner with the present

          occurrence. It is next submitted that the allegation against the

          petitioner is of recovery of 615.24 liters of foreign liquor and

          1908 liters of beer from Samudayik Bhawan and the same is

          under construction. It is next submitted that the petitioner has no

          role at all in the present occurrence and petitioner is in custody

          since 30.03.2026.

                      5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State

          has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and

          submits that petitioner has antecedent of one case other than the

          present case but fairly submits that petitioner is on bail in the

          pending matter.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,

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

          bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of

          the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive

          Special Court of Excise, Patna City (Bihar) in connection with

          Mehandiganj Excise P.S. Case No. 87 of 2026, subject to the

          following conditions:-

                       i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31478 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026
                                                       3/3




                     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.

                                  ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the

                     witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to

                     move for cancellation of bail.

                                  iii. 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 antecedent, 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)
Gaurav Sinha/-

U      T