Patna High Court
Manjeet Kumar @ Manjit Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail with conditions, pending verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
Manjeet Kumar sought anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for alleged recovery of 433.340 litres of liquor from a Tata Sumo. He argued that he was not arrested on the spot, no liquor was found in his possession, he does not own the vehicle, and the case against him rests on a confessional statement made by Kishan Kumar while in police custody, which he contended lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.25,000 with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent; if more than five prior cases are found, the bail will not be confirmed, otherwise it will be confirmed.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. to the petitioner given the nature of the allegations and his criminal antecedent?
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedent
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 438 CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60922 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-160 Year-2025 Thana- Lakho District- Begusarai
======================================================
Manjeet Kumar @ Manjit Kumar Singh S/O Raghubir Singh @ Raghuwar
Singh Resident of Village- Iniyar (Dhabauli) P.S.- Lakho, District- Begusarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bimal Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Iftekhar Mahmood, A.P.P.
======================================================
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 30(a),
32(3) and 41(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise
(Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of five cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 433.340 litres of liquor from a Tata
Sumo.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted
that petitioner is not the owner of the seized vehicle and came to
be implicated based on the confessional statement of Kishan
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60922 of 2025(3) dt.06-01-2026
2/3
Kumar in police custody which does not have any evidentiary
value in the eye of law. It is next submitted that once an accused
is implicated in a case relating to excise the police start
implicating mechanically either at the instance of the
Chawkidar, local person, secret information or confessional
statement without holding a proper investigation of the case.
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, let 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.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five 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 Lakho P.S. Case No. 160 of 2025, subject to the conditions
as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial
court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if
it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than five cases,
it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60922 of 2025(3) dt.06-01-2026
3/3
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner has antecedent of only five cases in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…