Nandlal Manjhi @ Nandlal Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24989 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-387 Year-2025 Thana- ADAPUR District- East Champaran ====================================================== Nandlal Manjhi @ Nandlal Mahto Son of Late Lakshandeo Manjhi @ Lakshandeo Mahto Resident of Village - Barwadih Dhangar Toli, P.S.- Adapur, District - East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Geeta Kumari For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Zainul Abedin ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-04-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a), 32 and 41(i) of the Bihar Excise Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 50 liters of liquor from house of Suresh Manjhi and 50 liters of liquor from house of petitioner

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not apprehended 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 the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his knowledge and after amendment in the excise act in the year

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24989 of 2026(2) dt.18-04-2026 2/2 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 also submitted that if Chowkidar was aware of 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. It is also submitted that petitioner is in custody since 28.01.2026 and if privilege of bail is granted, the petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the trial to prove his innocence.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the bail application of the petitioner.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, is directed to be released on 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 Adapur P.S. Case No. 387 of 2025.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T