Patna High Court
Chaitu ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail, granting provisional bail subject to bond and verification of antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Chaitu Manjhi, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case under Section 30(a)(c) of the Excise Act, alleging recovery of 20 litres of liquor from his joint family house. He argued that he had no conscious possession, the liquor was not in his exclusive control, and the recent amendment to the Excise Act had abolished the concept of deemed possession. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is found, the bail would be revoked; otherwise, it would be confirmed. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the alleged offence involves possession of liquor under Section 30 of the Excise Act after the amendment removing deemed possession.
- Whether the fact that the liquor was recovered from a joint family house negates the allegation of possession by the petitioner.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent is a condition for confirming anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 30(c)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 30
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- clean antecedent
- Section 438
- bail bond
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57309 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-307 Year-2022 Thana- GOPALPUR District- Patna
======================================================
Chaitu Manjhi Son of Ramashish Manjhi R/o Village - Manoharpur
Kachchuara, P.S. - Gopalpur, Dist. - Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shyam Kumar Chaudhary
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Kumar Ranjit Ranjan
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 06-01-2026 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
Section 30(a)(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 20 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner
apart from other recoveries from the house of other co-accused
as detailed in the FIR.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57309 of 2025(3) dt.06-01-2026
2/3
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.
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
Gopalpur P. S. Case No.307 of 2022, 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
found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, then it
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57309 of 2025(3) dt.06-01-2026
3/3
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…