Patna High Court

Kuhas ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 19 February 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail with conditions, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.

Summary

Kuhas Manjhi applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, alleging recovery of 45 litres of liquor from a paddy field water tank, a location not under his exclusive control. He contended that the alleged recovery was not from his conscious possession and that he was implicated due to an inimical relationship with the chawkidar. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a Rs.5,000 bond with two sureties, invoking Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The order further directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, stipulating that if more than one prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in view of the alleged offence under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

Legislation cited

Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a)
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Section 30(a)
Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Section 482 BNSS
criminal antecedent
liquor seizure
bail conditions

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7393 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-129 Year-2025 Thana- CHANAN District- Lakhisarai
                 ======================================================
                 Kuhas Manjhi S/O Mistri Manjhi @ Misri Manjhi R/O Village- Mananpur,
                 Basti, P.S.- Chanan, District- Lakhisarai.
                                                                        ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                 ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Dr. Anjani Pd. Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Lakshmi Kant Sharma, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   19-02-2026                  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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar

                   Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and

                   allegation is of recovery of 45 litres of liquor from a place behind the

                   water tank in a paddy field.

                                4. 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 alleged

                   recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner and

                   is accessible to villagers at large. It is further submitted that

                   petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of the Chawkidar

                   with whom he is on an inimical term.
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7393 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
                                                       2/2




                                  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 within a period of six weeks from today, be

                     released on provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of

                     Rs.5,000/- (Rupees 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 Chanan P.S. Case

                     No. 129 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section

                     438(2) of the Cr.P.C./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 if it is found

                     that petitioner has antecedent of more than one case, it would be

                     presumed that petitioner had concealed his 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 one case

                     in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be

                     confirmed forthwith.


                                                                         (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U     T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…