Patna High Court
Manoj UraonversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Summary
Manoj Uraon applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case alleging violation of Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for possession of liquor. The petitioner argued he had a clean antecedent, the liquor was recovered from a joint family house, and no conscious possession was established, especially after the 2018 amendment removing the concept of deemed possession. The State opposed the bail. The court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish bail bonds of Rs.500 with two sureties and appear before the trial court within six weeks. The order is subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, with the bail to be confirmed if he is found to have a clean record, or revoked if any antecedent is discovered.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the alleged possession of liquor in a joint family house establishes the petitioner as a deemed offender under the amended Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent warrants the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30 Excise Act
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- Criminal Procedure Code
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88968 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-132 Year-2025 Thana- Pothia District- Katihar
======================================================
Manoj Uraon S/o Late Gopal Uraon Resdient of village - Dumar Aadivasi
Tola, P .S - Pothia, Ditirct- Katihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bhola Prasad
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ramesh Chandra
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 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) 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 45 litres of liquor from house of the petitioner
and 40 litres of liquor from house of Bhola Uraon.
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
with certainty that it was the petitioner, who had kept the liquor
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88968 of 2025(2) dt.06-01-2026
2/3
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 and he came to be implicated at the instance of
Chaukidar with whom he is on an inimical term.
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
Pothiya P. S. Case No.132 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 even one case, then it
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88968 of 2025(2) 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…