Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Appu ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISPOSED

Holding

The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, subject to specified conditions and verification of the petitioners' antecedent.

Summary

The petitioners, four members of the Manjhi family, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case alleging offences under Sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 50 litres of liquor from their jointly owned house. They argued that they have no prior criminal record, that the liquor was not found in their conscious possession, and that the house is a joint family property, making it uncertain who stored the liquor. The prosecution, represented by the State, opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to the petitioners furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500 each with two sureties, verification of their antecedent, and a deposit of Rs.3,000 with the Lawyers Association, reserving the right to cancel the bail if any criminal antecedent is discovered. The order was made conditional on compliance with Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case of alleged possession of liquor under the Excise Act.
  • Whether the concept of deemed possession applies after the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act.
  • Whether the petitioners' clean antecedent and lack of direct possession justify granting bail.
  • What conditions may be imposed on provisional anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • Excise Act
  • Section 438 CrPC
  • deemed possession
  • clean antecedent
  • joint family property
  • provisional bail

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5469 of 2026
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-270 Year-2025 Thana- CHIRAIYA District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
           1.     Appu Manjhi Son of Sudama Manjhi R/o Village - Manguraha, Dhangar
                  Toil, P.S. - Chiraiya, Dist. - East Champaran.
           2.    Pappu Manjhi Son of Sudama Manjhi R/o Village - Manguraha, Dhangar
                 Toil, P.S. - Chiraiya, Dist. - East Champaran.
           3.    Sudama Manjhi Son of Faguni Manjhi R/o Village - Manguraha, Dhangar
                 Toil, P.S. - Chiraiya, Dist. - East Champaran.
           4.    Pargan Manjhi Son of Late Batahu Manjhi R/o Village - Manguraha,
                 Dhangar Toil, P.S. - Chiraiya, Dist. - East Champaran.

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Roshan Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Harendra Prasad
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   02-02-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest

                   in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections

                   30(a) and 41(1) of the Excise Act.

                                3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

                   the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the allegation

                   is of recovery of 50 litres of liquor from house of the petitioner.

                                4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

                   petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was

                   recovered from their conscious possession and even the house in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5469 of 2026(2) dt.02-02-2026
                                            2/3




          question is a joint family property and thus, 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 Act, 2018, the concept of

          deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away

          with and the petitioner they came to be implicated at the instance

          of Chaukidar, but then, if Chaukidar was aware of the involvement

          of the petitioners in the occurrence, then why he did not inform the

          police prior to institution of the present F.I.R., which casts an

          aspersion on the case of the prosecution, when admittedly

          petitioners are persons with clean antecedent.

                       5. Learned A.P.P.          opposes     the   anticipatory   bail

          application.

                       6. Considering the submissions made by the learned

          counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners, above-named, in the

          event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below

          within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on

          provisional anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in the

          sum of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) each 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

          Chiraiya P. S. Case No.270 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid

          down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5469 of 2026(2) dt.02-02-2026
                                                           3/3




                                      7. The application stands allowed.

                                      8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after

                         accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioners shall verify

                         the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the event, if it is

                         found that petitioners have antecedent of even one case, then it

                         would be presumed that petitioners for the purposes of obtaining

                         anticipatory bail had concealed their 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 petitioners

                         are persons with clean antecedent, in that event, the provisional

                         anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

                                      9. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing on behalf

                         of the petitioner based on instruction submits that petitioner

                         undertakes to deposit an amount of Rs.3,000/- with Lawyers

                         Association, Patna High Court, Patna within a period of two weeks

                         from today.



                                                   (Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-

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.