Patna High Court
Ajay ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to bond and sureties, with confirmation contingent upon verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Ajay Manjhi, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with an alleged offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, involving recovery of liquor from his house and those of relatives. He argued that he was not arrested, that the liquor was located in a joint family property and thus could not be attributed to his conscious possession, and that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act had abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail, contending that the allegations warranted detention. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and conditioned the confirmation of bail on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. If more than one prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one prior case is found, the bail will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- What is the applicability of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case involving alleged possession of liquor under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016?
- Does the amendment to the Excise Act in 2018 eliminate the doctrine of deemed possession and presumed offender for joint family property?
- Should the petitioner be granted bail despite alleged prior antecedents?
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39001 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-59 Year-2026 Thana- SAKURABAD District- Jehanabad
======================================================
Ajay Manjhi S/O Haricharan Manjhi R/O Village- Ratni Manjhi Tola, P.S-
Shakurabad, Dist.- Jehanabad.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Asha Devi, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 29-06-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under 30(a) of the Bihar
Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 15 litres of liquor from the house of
the petitioner, 15 litres of liquor from the house of Munna
Manjhi and 30 litres of liquor from the house of Sarju Manjhi.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted
that the house in question is a joint family property, as such, it
cannot be alleged with certainty that it was the petitioner who
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39001 of 2026(2) dt.29-06-2026
2/3
had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house
was within his knowledge and after amendment in the Excise
Act in the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and
presumed offender has been done away with. It is next
submitted that petitioner came to be implicated based on the
secret information which is the easiest way to implicate
someone without holding a proper investigation of the case. It is
also submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case
relating to excise the police start implicating mechanically either
at the instance of the Chawkidar, local person, confessional
statement or secret information without holding a proper
investigation of the case.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let the petitioner,
above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a
period of six weeks from today, be released on provisional
anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds 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 Sakurabad P.S.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39001 of 2026(2) dt.29-06-2026
3/3
Case No. 59 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned
Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner
and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one
case, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner has antecedent of only one case in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.