Patna High Court
Suresh ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that provisional anticipatory bail may be granted subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and verification of the petitioners' antecedents.
Summary
The petitioners, Suresh Manjhi and Kishori Manjhi, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case registered under Sections 30(a), 32 and 41(1) of the Excise Act, alleging recovery of five litres of liquor each from their joint family house. They argued that they have clean antecedents, were not arrested at the scene, and that the liquor was found in a jointly owned property, making it uncertain whether they had knowledge or control over it. They further contended that the watchman who reported the incident was on inimical terms with them and had not informed the police earlier, casting doubt on the prosecution's case. The State opposed the anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.500 each with two sureties, and directed the trial court to verify the petitioners' criminal antecedents before confirming the bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case of alleged possession of illicit liquor under the Excise Act.
- Whether the absence of arrest and the fact that the alleged liquor was found in a joint family property affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the credibility of the watchman's allegations is sufficient to deny bail.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 32, 41(1)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 438
- provisional bail
- joint family property
- liquor possession
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31802 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-86 Year-2022 Thana- PAHARPUR District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Suresh Manjhi S/o Akal Manjhi @ Akalu Manjhi R/o vill - Bishunpur @
Vishunpur Matiarwa, @ Vishunpur Matiyarva, P.S.- Paharpur, Distt.- East
Champaran
2. Kishori Manjhi S/o Baran Manjhi @ Varan Manjhi @ Ramavaran Manjhi
R/o vill - Bishunpur @ Vishunpur Matiarwa, @ Vishunpur Matiyarva, P.S.-
Paharpur, Distt.- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pramod Kumar Prasad
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ram Sumiran Rai
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 30(a), 32 and 41(1) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the
allegation is of recovery of 05 litres of liquor each from the
house of both the petitioners.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from their conscious possession and even the house in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31802 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
2/3
question is a joint family property and thus, it cannot be alleged
with certainty that it were the petitioners, who had kept the
liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within
their knowledge and they came to be implicated at the instance
of Chaukidar with whom they are on an inimical term. It is
further submitted that if Chaukidar was aware of the
involvement of the petitioners in the occurrence, then why he
did not inform the police prior to institution of the present F.I.R.,
which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners, above-named, in the
event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in
the sum of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) each 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 Paharpur P. S. Case No.86 of 2022, subject to
the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31802 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
3/3
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioners shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the event,
if it is found that petitioners have antecedent of even one case,
then it would be presumed that petitioners for the purposes of
obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed their antecedent
before this Court, in that event, the present provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but if on
verification, it is found that petitioners are persons with clean
antecedent, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.