Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Manoj Sahani @ Manoj KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISPOSED

Holding

The Court provisionally granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.

Summary

Manoj Sahani was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for allegedly recovering 119 litres of liquor from a bush. He argued that he was not arrested on the spot, the liquor was not in his possession, and the location did not belong to him, contending that the investigation relied on secret information without proper inquiry. The petitioner, who has four prior excise cases, sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.20,000 with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent; if more than four prior cases are found, the bail will not be confirmed, otherwise it will be confirmed. The order is subject to compliance with the conditions laid down by the trial court.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
  • Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent of four excise cases affects the grant of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • excise law
  • Section 30
  • criminal antecedent
  • Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
  • Cr.P.C. Section 438
  • B.N.S.S. Section 482

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9205 of 2026
                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-232 Year-2025 Thana- Raghunathpur District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Manoj Sahani @ Manoj Kumar S/o Ganesh Sahani R/o vill - Majhariya, P.S.-
                 Raghunathpur, Distt.- East Champaran
                                                                        ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                  Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                 ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Abhay Kumar, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   15-04-2026                  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 (Amendment) Act, 2022.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of four cases under the Excise Act and

                   allegation is of recovery of 119 litres of liquor from a bush.

                                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 based on the secret information

                   which is the easiest way to implicate someone. It is next
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9205 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
                                            2/3




          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, confessional statement

          or secret information without holding a proper investigation of

          the case. It is also submitted that petitioner in similar manner

          earlier also came to be implicated in cases relating to excise.

                       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 appearing on behalf of 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.20,000/-

          (Rupees Twenty 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 Raghunathpur

          P.S. Case No. 232 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid

          down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

                       7. However, 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 four

          cases, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9205 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
                                                       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 four cases in that event the

                     provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.


                                                                         (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U     T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.