Patna High Court
Sushil Kumar @ Sushil Kumar ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail may be granted in the present case subject to conditions, with verification of antecedents, as the petitioner was not in possession and the confessional statement lacks evidentiary value.
Summary
The petitioner, Sushil Kumar Manjhi, applied for anticipatory bail in a case registered under Sections 30(a), 36, 38 and 41 of the Excise Act for allegedly recovering 621.120 litres of liquor from a Tata Sumo vehicle. He has two prior criminal cases and was not arrested at the spot, nor was any liquor found in his possession; the prosecution’s case relied on a confessional statement made by a co‑accused in police custody, which the petitioner argued lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offences and the petitioner’s antecedents. The Court examined the lack of direct possession, the questionable reliability of the confessional statement, and the statutory provisions governing anticipatory bail. It directed that provisional anticipatory bail be granted on the condition of a Rs 10,000 bail bond with two sureties and compliance with Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C., subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents by the trial court. The bail will be confirmed only if the petitioner is found to have no more than two prior cases; otherwise, the provisional order may be set aside.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. can be granted in a case under the Excise Act where the accused is not in possession of the alleged contraband.
- Whether a confessional statement made by a co‑accused in police custody can be relied upon to deny anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 36, 38, 41
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 438 CrPC
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedent
- bail bond
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5932 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-596 Year-2025 Thana- GARKHA District- Saran
======================================================
Sushil Kumar @ Sushil Kumar Manjhi S/O Late Hira Manjhi R/o Village-
Shivrahiya, P.S.-Garkha, District-Saran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Matloob Rab
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 30-01-2026 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
Sections 30(a), 36, 38 and 41 of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of two cases and allegation is of
recovery of 621.120 litres of liquor from Tata Sumo vehicle.
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 is not the owner of
the seized vehicle and he came to be implicated based on
confessional statement of Pintu in police custody, which does
not have any evidentiary value. It is also submitted that off late,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5932 of 2026(2) dt.30-01-2026
2/3
the police has started implicating accused who carry antecedent
without holding a proper investigation.
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.10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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 Garkha P. S. Case No.596 of 2025, 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 more than two cases,
then it 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5932 of 2026(2) dt.30-01-2026
3/3
order shall not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found
that petitioner has antecedent of two cases only, 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.2500/- with
Lawyers’ Association, Patna High Court, Patna within a period
of two weeks from today.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.