Patna High Court
Manoj Kumar Yadav @ Manoj YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedents.
Summary
Manish Kumar Yadav was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2016 for allegedly possessing 324 litres of liquor recovered from his joint family house. He contended that he had a clean antecedent, that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, and that the concept of deemed possession had been removed by the 2018 amendment to the Act. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, arguing that the police had acted without proper investigation. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted a provisional anticipatory bail order, requiring the petitioner to furnish bail bonds and two sureties, and directed the trial court to verify his criminal antecedents before confirming the bail.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2016.
- Whether the removal of the deemed‑possession provision by the 2018 amendment affects the presumption of guilt.
- Whether the trial court should verify the petitioner’s antecedents before confirming the bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53437 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-126 Year-2025 Thana- BHAPTIAHI District- Supaul
======================================================
1. Manish Kumar Yadav @ Manish Yadav S/O Late Vasudev Yadav R/O
Village- Gadhiya, Ward No.-10, P.S- Bhaptiyahi, Distt.- Supaul.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Mishra
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mohammed Arif
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
5 19-01-2026 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 Amendment Act, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 324 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner.
It is next submitted that petitioner was not arrested 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 with certainty that it was petitioner, who had
kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53437 of 2025(5) dt.19-01-2026
2/3
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 he came to be implicated
at the instance of SHO and the police team without holding a
proper investigation, when petitioner admittedly is a person with
clean antecedent.
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 before the learned Court below
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
Bhaptiyahi P.S. Case No.126/2025, 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53437 of 2025(5) dt.19-01-2026
3/3
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
antecedent, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…