Patna High Court
Sikandar Manjhi @ Sikandar KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent and compliance with the stipulated bail conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Sikandar Manjhi, sought anticipatory bail after a case was registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly possessing 40 litres of liquor at his joint family house. He argued that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, that the house is a joint family property, and that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act abolished the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.15,000 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedent. If the petitioner is found to have more than three prior excise cases, the bail will not be confirmed; if he has exactly three, the bail will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act where the alleged possession is in a joint family house.
- Whether the 2018 amendment to the Bihar Excise Act eliminates the doctrine of deemed possession and presumed offender for bail considerations.
- What conditions, if any, should be imposed on the grant of anticipatory bail in such circumstances.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- criminal antecedent
- Section 30(a)
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44322 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2026 Thana- MALAHI District- East Champaran
======================================================
Sikandar Manjhi @ Sikandar Kumar Son of Rajendra Manjhi @ Rajendra
Mahto Resident of Village- Sirni Dhangad Toli, P.S.- Malahai, District- East
Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate, APP
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Narsingh Tanti
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 07-07-2026 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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of three cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 40 liters of liquor from house of the
petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing
was recovered from his conscious possession and the house in
question is a joint family property, as such, it cannot be alleged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44322 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
2/3
with certainty that it was 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 act in the year
2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender
has been done away with and came to be implicated at the
instance of Chowkidar and local person. It is next submitted that
it does not appear probable that Chowkidar and local person
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 for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Trial Court
within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
Provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.
15000/- (Rupees Fifteen 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 Malahi
P.S. Case No. 33 of 2026 subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court
shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44322 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
3/3
three cases then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent
before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall not be confirmed, but after verification if it is found that
petitioner has antecedent of three cases only, in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.