Manish Mandal @ Manish Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17352 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-329 Year-2024 Thana- KASIMBAZAR District- Munger ====================================================== Manish Mandal @ Manish Kumar S/O Sachchidanand Mandal @ Sachita Mandal Resident of Mohalla - Maksuspur Koyri Tola, P.S- Kasim Bazar, DistMunger ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Arvind Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Nand Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 21-04-2025 Heard Mr. Arvind Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Nand Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest connection with Kasim Bazar P.S. Case No. 329 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 12.11.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition & Excise Act, 2016.

3. Recovery is of 30 liters of countrymade liquor.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case on the basis of his past criminal antecedent. He further submits that it appears from the F.I.R. as well as seizure list that nothing has been recovered from the conscious

2/4 possession of the petitioner. He further submits that co-accused person namely Aashish Mandal @ Ashish Mandal @ Ashish Kumar @ Ashish who happens to be brother of the petitioner has also been made accused in the present case has been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 07.03.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 10764 of 2025. Therefore, the recovery cannot be attributed to the petitioner. There is non-compliance with mandatory procedure prescribed for recovery under Section 100 of Cr. P.C./ Section 103 of BNSS, 2023 No case, whatsoever, would be made out against the petitioner under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner referring the provision contained in Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and submitted that the prearrest bail would not be maintainable. He further submits that the petitioner carries three more cases, out of three cases, two cases are of similar nature other than the present one but fairly submits on the basis of paragraph-3 of the bail petition that the petitioner is on bail in the pending matters.

6. This court is aware of the decision of the Full

3/4 Bench in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav vs. State of Bihar reported in 2019(2) P.LJ.R. 1089. Having regard to the law laid down in the aforesaid judgment and the submission advanced on behalf of the parties, this Court, for the limited purpose of grant of anticipatory bail, is inclined to accept the submission of counsel for the petitioner.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts that nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner and co-accused person has been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order. be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Judge Excise-1, Munger in connection with Kasim Bazar PS. Case No. 329 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with other following conditions:-

1. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and

4/4 on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

2. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

3. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Ibrar//- U T