Patna High Court
Sumit Kumar @ Sumit ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to bail bond, sureties and verification of the petitioner’s antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Sumit Kumar, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 for allegedly possessing 43.4 litres of liquor recovered from a bamboo orchard adjacent to his house. He argued that he had no prior criminal record, the liquor was not found in his immediate possession, and the recovery site did not belong to him, questioning the basis for his arrest. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his antecedents. If any prior case is discovered, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed forthwith. The order is subject to the provisions of Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of the case
- Whether the facts alleged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 justify denial of bail
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged clean antecedent warrants provisional bail pending verification
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- clean antecedent
- Section 482(2)
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39525 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-148 Year-2026 Thana- JALALPUR District- Saran
======================================================
Sumit Kumar @ Sumit Manjhi S/o Dinesh Manjhi @ Diniesh Paswan R/o
Village - Sakkadi, P.S. - Jalalpur, District - Saran at Chapra.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Avinash Kumar Pandey
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Parmanand Prasad
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 22-06-2026 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 Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 43.400 litres of liquor from a bamboo orchard
behind the house of petitioner. It is next submitted that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and even alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
but then is adjacent to his house and he came to be implicated at
the instance of chowkidar and local person but then it is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39525 of 2026(2) dt.22-06-2026
2/3
submitted that if chowkidar and local person were aware of the
involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence then why they
did not inform the police prior to institution of the instant FIR
which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, 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.500/- (Rupees five hundred) 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 Jalalpur P.S. Case No.148/2026, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one
case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had
concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
on verification it is found that petitioner is a person with clean
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39525 of 2026(2) dt.22-06-2026
3/3
antecedent, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.