Munmun Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32161 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-39 Year-2026 Thana- SANJHOLI District- Rohtas ====================================================== 1.
Munmun Kumar S/O Vijay Kumar R/O Village- Charpurwa, P.S.- Sanjhauli, Distt.- Rohtas at Sasaram.
2.
Deepak Kumar @ Nitish Kumar S/O Madan Singh R/O Chawariya, P.S.- Sanjhauli, Distt.- Rohtas at Sasaram.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Chhote Lal Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Sanjay Kumar Sharma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 13-05-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner no.1 has antecedent of one case and petitioner no.2 is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 10 litres of liquor from a bush and a motorcycle was seized.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32161 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026 2/3 recovered from their conscious possession and are not the owner of the seized vehicle and they came to be implicated based on confessional statement of Pawan in police custody, which does not have any evidentiary value. It is also submitted that after Amendment in the Excise Act, 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away with.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners, above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on provisional anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum 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 Sanjhauli P. S. Case No.39 of 2026, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioners shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the event,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32161 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026 3/3 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 obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed their antecedent before this Court, in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found that petitioner no.1 has antecedent of one case only 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) vikash/- U T