Patna High Court
SANDEEP MANJHI @ CHANDRADEEP MANJHIversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that, owing to the petitioner’s clean antecedent and the absence of concrete evidence of possession, provisional anticipatory bail may be granted subject to verification of antecedent under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
Summary
The petitioner, Sandeep Manjhi, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with alleged offences under Sections 30(a) and 30(c) of the Excise Act, where 10 litres of liquor and 80 litres of fermented material were recovered from a house that is part of a joint family property. The petitioner claimed a clean antecedent and argued that no liquor was found in his personal possession and that the recovery was based on secret information without proper investigation. The State opposed the bail, contending that the offences were cognizable. The Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds and two sureties, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional bail would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for alleged offences under the Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged possession of liquor can be established given the joint family ownership of the premises.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent warrants the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 30(c)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438
- Excise Act
- possession
- joint family property
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39901 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-26 Year-2026 Thana- Hathiyav District- Sheikhpura
======================================================
Sandeep Manjhi @ Chandradeep Manjhi S/O Vishnudev Manjhi R/O Village
Gosaimardhi, P.S - Haithiyawa, District - Sheikhpura, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/S
Versus
The State Of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms.Vandna Rani
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Mritunjay Kumar Nirala
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 23-06-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 30(a) and 30(c) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is
of recovery of 10 litres of liquor along with 80 litres of
fermented material from the house of the petitioner.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and even the house in
question is a joint family property and thus, it cannot be alleged
with certainty that it was the petitioner, who had kept the liquor
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39901 of 2026(2) dt.23-06-2026
2/3
in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his
knowledge and after Amendment in the Excise Act, 2018, the
concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been
done away with and he came to be implicated based on secret
information without holding a proper investigation, when
admittedly petitioner is a person with clean antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum 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
Hathiyawa P. S. Case No.26 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 petitioner shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39901 of 2026(2) dt.23-06-2026
3/3
found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, then it
would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining
anticipatory bail had concealed his 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 is a person 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.