Patna High Court
Naresh ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioners, subject to a cash bond and strict conditions of appearance and non‑interference with the trial.
Summary
Naresh Manjhi and Mugeshwar Manjhi were charged under Sections 30(a)(d) and 37(a)(b)(d) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act in Makhdumpur P.S. Case No. 282 of 2017. They had previously been granted bail in 2017, which was cancelled in 2023 for non‑appearance, re‑granted in June 2025, and again cancelled in June 2025 for the same reason, leading to their arrest in November 2025. The petitioners pleaded innocence and sought fresh bail, asserting they had not been informed of the latest cancellation and were willing to comply with any conditions. The State opposed bail, noting the petitioners’ repeated failure to appear and that charges had not yet been framed. Considering the length of custody, the petitioners’ undertaking, and the circumstances, the High Court granted bail subject to a cash bond and specific conditions regarding appearance, non‑tampering with evidence, and non‑intimidation of witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioners despite prior cancellations for non‑appearance
- Whether the court can impose conditions on bail in the context of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act offences
Subjects
- bail
- excise offences
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- non‑appearance
- criminal procedure
- court conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9296 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-282 Year-2017 Thana- MAKHDUMPUR District- Jehanabad
======================================================
1. Naresh Manjhi S/O Late Shugi Manjhi R/O Village - Sumera (Mahadalit
Tola) P.S- Makhdumpur, District- Jehanabad (Bihar)
2. Mugeshwar Manjhi S/O Late Jamuna Manjhi R/O Village - Sumera
(Mahadalit Tola) P.S- Makhdumpur, District- Jehanabad (Bihar)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Indu Kumari Srivastava, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in connection with
Makhdumpur P.S. Case No. 282 of 2017 (Excise Case No. 1834
of 2017) instituted for the offences under Sections 30(a)(d) and
37(a)(b)(d) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted
that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been
implicated in this case. The present case is misuse of privilege
of bail earlier granted to the petitioners. Earlier, the petitioners
have been granted regular bail vide order dated 21.11.2017 by
the learned Spl. Excise Court-I, Jehanabad. He further submits
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9296 of 2026(2) dt.12-02-2026
2/3
that due to non-appearance of petitioners, the bail bonds of the
petitioners got cancelled vide order dated 14.06.2023.
Thereafter, petitioners were again enlarged on bail on
04.06.2025 with direction to the petitioners to appear in the
Court. But due to non-appearance of the petitioners their bail
bonds were cancelled on 09.06.2025. Thereafter, petitioners
have been arrested on 30.11.2025. Learned counsel further
submitted that the petitioners have not been given any
information regarding cancellation of his bail bond by his
counsel. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that
the petitioners undertake to abide by any conditions imposed by
this Court, if released on bail.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. He further
submitted that due non-appearance of the petitioners charge has
not been framed.
5. Considering the aforesaid facts and
circumstances of the case, as also the period of custody
undergone by the petitioner as also the undertaking given by the
petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
6. Let the petitioner be released on bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- ( Rupees Fifteen
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9296 of 2026(2) dt.12-02-2026
3/3
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection
withMakhdumpur P.S. Case No. 282 of 2017 (Excise Case No.
1834 of 2017), subject to the following conditions:
(I) One of the bailors shall be the petitioners’ own or
close member.
(II) The petitioners shall appear on each and every
date fixed during the trial and shall not remain absent on two
consecutive dates without sufficient cause.
(III) The petitioners shall not tamper with the
prosecution evidence or influence/intimidate any witness during
the course of trial.
In case of violation of any of the aforesaid conditions,
the Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the
petitioners.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.