Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Balindra ManjhiversusThe State Of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISPOSED

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions and verification of his criminal antecedent.

Summary

The petitioner, Balindra Manjhi, was implicated in a case alleging recovery of 21 litres of liquor from his house, an offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022. He contended that he has a clean antecedent, the liquor was stored in a joint family property and he had no conscious possession, and that the concept of deemed possession was abolished by the 2018 amendment. The petitioner also argued that the accusation stemmed from a hostile watchman (chawkidar) and that the watchman could not identify who concealed the liquor. The State opposed the grant of anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., directing the trial court to verify the petitioner’s antecedent before confirming the bail.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case of alleged possession of liquor under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
  • Whether the doctrine of deemed possession applies post the 2018 amendment.
  • Whether the petitioner can be presumed to be the offender based on the watchman's allegation.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • possession
  • liquor
  • Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
  • joint family property
  • criminal antecedent
  • Section 30(a)
  • Section 438
  • Section 482

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43387 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-138 Year-2026 Thana- WARISLIGANJ District- Nawada
                 ======================================================
                 Balindra Manjhi S/O Late Moti Manjhi Resident of Village- Pawipur, PS-
                 Warisaliganj, District- Nawada
                                                                         ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                  ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Man Mohan Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Harendra Prasad, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   02-07-2026                  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 the

                   Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 21 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner.

                                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

                   had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house

                   was within his knowledge and after amendment in the Excise
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43387 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026
                                            2/3




          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 at the instance of

          the Chawkidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is also

          submitted that it does not appear probable that the Chawkidar

          would have known who had concealed the liquor in the house.

                       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.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 Warisaliganj P.S.

          Case No. 138 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 even one case,

          it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43387 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026
                                                       3/3




                     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 is a person with clean antecedent in that event the

                     provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.


                                                                          (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U     T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.