Rakesh Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24361 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-22 Year-2026 Thana- CHAKIA District- East Champaran ====================================================== Rakesh Manjhi S/o Ramchandra Manjhi Resident of Village- Mushari Tola, Koyala Belwa, PS- Chakiya, Distt.- East Champaran at Motihari ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Abhishek Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 20-04-2026
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 is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 52 litres of liquor from a straw house of the petitioner.
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 straw house is a place outside the house and, thus, is accessible to villagers at large, as such, it is submitted that someone inimical to the family of the petitioner concealed meager amount of liquor with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24361 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026 2/3 an intent to implicate the entire family members. It is further submitted that no prudent person would use his own premises for committing an occurrence and, thus, would create evidence against himself and, hence, would get implicated. It is next submitted that petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of the local person but then the name of the person who disclosed the name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution, when petitioner has not been implicated based on the secret information and is a person with clean antecedent.
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.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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 Chakiya P.S. Case No. 22 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24361 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026 3/3
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 even one case, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his 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 is a person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T