Patna High Court
Mukesh ManjhiversusThe State Of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his antecedent and compliance with the stipulated conditions.
Summary
Mukesh Manjhi was implicated in a case (PS No. 253 of 2021) for allegedly possessing eight litres of liquor, alleged offences under Sections 272 and 273 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 30(a) and 30(d) of the Bihar Excise Act. The petitioner claimed he had a clean antecedent, that the liquor was found in a joint‑family house and that he had no conscious possession, especially after the 2018 amendment that removed the concept of deemed possession. The State opposed his prayer for anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a modest bond, two sureties and a condition that the trial court verify his antecedent; if any prior case is found, the bail would be cancelled, otherwise confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The decision reflects the Court’s cautious approach to granting bail where possession is not clearly established.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the alleged offence involves alleged possession of illicit liquor without the accused being in actual possession.
- Whether the amendment to the Bihar Excise Act removing deemed possession affects the bail considerations.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 272, 273
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- possession
- excise law
- IPC 272
- IPC 273
- Bihar Excise Act
- joint family property
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57474 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-253 Year-2021 Thana- SONO District- Jamui
======================================================
Mukesh Manjhi S/O Pakhori Manjhi @ Pakodi Manjhi R/O Vill.- Ashana,
P.S.- Sono, District- Jamui
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satya Prakash Parasar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 06-01-2026 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 offences punishable under Sections 272 and
273 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 30(a) and 30(d)
of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 8 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
with certainty that it was petitioner who had kept the liquor in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57474 of 2025(3) dt.06-01-2026
2/3
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 he came to be implicated based on
secret information which is the easiest way to implicate
someone.
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.
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 Sono P.S.
Case No. 253 of 2021 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 even
one case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57474 of 2025(3) dt.06-01-2026
3/3
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 is a person with clean
antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…