Manoj Kumar Sah @ Manoj SahversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9490 of 2026
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1201 Year-2025 Thana- SAHARSA SADAR District- Saharsa
                 ======================================================
           1.     Manoj Kumar Sah @ Manoj Sah S/o Harilal Sah R/o vill - Bengha, P.S.-
                  Saharsa Sadar, Distt.- Saharsa
           2.    Suman Kumar S/o Manoj Kumar Sah @ Manoj Sah R/o vill - Bengha, P.S.-
                 Saharsa Sadar, Distt.- Saharsa

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr.Binod Kumar Sinha
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr.Akshay Lal Pandit
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   23-02-2026               1.    Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and

                   learned A.P.P. for the State.

                             2.    The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case

                   registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and

                   30(c) of the Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

                   petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act

                   and petitioner no. 2 is a person with clean antecedent and

                   allegation is of recovery of 10 litres of liquor from a bamboo

                   orchard.

                             4.    Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

                   petitioners were not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9490 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
                                            2/3




          recovered from their conscious possession and even the alleged

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

          and they came to be implicated at the instance of local people,

          but then the name of the person, who disclosed the name of the

          petitioners is not disclosed in the FIR, which casts an aspersion

          on the case of the prosecution. It is further submitted that once

          an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police

          starts implicating mechanically either at the instance of

          Chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret

          information without holding a proper investigation.

                   5.     Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

          anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

                   6.     Considering the submissions made by the learned

          counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the

          event of their 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)

          each 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 Saharsa Sadar P.S. Case No. 1201 of

          2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section

          Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9490 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
                                                          3/3




                                 7.     It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court

                        shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the

                        event if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of more

                        than one case and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of even one

                        case then it would be presumed that petitioners, for the purposes

                        of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed their antecedent before

                        this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not

                        be confirmed with respect to that petitioner who had concealed his

                        criminal antecedent before this Court, but after verification if it is

                        found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of one case and

                        petitioner no. 2 is a person with clean antecedent , in that event

                        the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed

                        forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T