Patna High Court
Sanjay Kumar @ Sanjay ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to bond and verification of antecedents, with confirmation contingent on the findings.
Summary
The petitioners, three brothers, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of liquor from a location adjacent to their house. They argued that they were not arrested, no liquor was found in their possession, and the complaint originated from a hostile watchman, casting doubt on the prosecution's case. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after hearing both sides, directed that the petitioners be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.15,000 each with sureties, subject to verification of their criminal antecedents. The order stipulated that if the petitioners have more prior cases than disclosed, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed. The application was allowed, granting conditional anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 CrPC for offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the absence of arrest and lack of possession of the alleged contraband justify granting anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioners' prior criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 30
- Criminal antecedent
- Section 438
- Patna High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38516 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-347 Year-2026 Thana- MADHAURAH District- Saran
======================================================
1. Sanjay Kumar @ Sanjay Manjhi Son of Shiv Nath Manjhi Resident of
village- Bardhiya /Bardahia, Ps- Madhaurah/ Marhowrah/ Marhuara, Dist-
Saran at Chapra
2. Ramesh Manjhi son of Shiv Nath Manjhi Resident of village- Bardhiya
/Bardahia, Ps- Madhaurah/ Marhowrah/ Marhuara, Dist- Saran at Chapra
3. Krishna Manjhi Son of Shiv Nath Manjhi Resident of village- Bardhiya
/Bardahia, Ps- Madhaurah/ Marhowrah/ Marhuara, Dist- Saran at Chapra
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ajit Kumar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Yogendra Kumar Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 18-06-2026 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) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioner no.1 has antecedent of three cases out of which two
cases are under the Excise Act and petitioner nos.2 and 3 have
antecedent of two cases out of which one case is under the Excise
Act and the allegation is of recovery of 11 litres of liquor from a
place behind the house of the petitioners along with 30 litres of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38516 of 2026(2) dt.18-06-2026
2/3
raw material was destroyed at the spot.
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 alleged
recovery is from a place, which does not belong to the petitioners,
but then, is adjacent to their house and he came to be implicated at
the instance of Chaukidar with whom he is 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. It is next
submitted that police in majority of cases implicating innocent
persons either at the behest of Chaukidar, local person, secret
information and confessional statement in a mechanical manner
without holding a proper investigation.
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. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) each with two
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38516 of 2026(2) dt.18-06-2026
3/3
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
Trial Court where the case is pending/ successor Court in
connection with Madhaurah/Marhowrah/ Marhuara P. S. Case
No.347 of 2026, 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 petitioners shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the event, if it is
found that petitioner no.1 has antecedent of more than three cases
and petitioner nos.2 and 3 have antecedent of more than two cases,
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
petitioner no.1 has antecedent of only three cases and petitioner
nos.2 and 3 have antecedent of only two cases, 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.