Guddu Kumar @ Guddu Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16596 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-413 Year-2025 Thana- CHANDAUTI District- Gaya ====================================================== GUDDU KUMAR @ GUDDU MANJHI S/O SURESH MANJHI R/O Village- Bhagalpur Channa, P.S.- Chandauti, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shailesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Upendra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 06-04-2026 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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 20 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and the house in question is a joint family property as such it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was petitioner who had kept the liquor in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16596 of 2026(3) dt.06-04-2026 2/3 the house or the liquor kept in the house was within knowledge of the petitioner. It is next submitted that after amendment in the Excise Act in the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away with and he came to be implicated at the instance of Chowkidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is next submitted that if Chowkidar was aware about the involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence, then why he did not inform the police prior to institution of the instant FIR, which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.

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 for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on Provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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 Chandauti P.S. Case No. 413 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16596 of 2026(3) dt.06-04-2026 3/3 7.

It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than two cases then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of two cases in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T