Chundu Manjhi @ Chintu Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36953 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-107 Year-2026 Thana- PATAHI District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.

Chundu Manjhi @ Chintu Manjhi S/o Suresh Manjhi Resident of VillageNonfarawa Dhangar Toli, Police Station- Patahi, District - East Champaran. 2.

Ramakant Manjhi @ Chintu Manjhi @ Ramakant Kumar, Son of Suresh Manjhi @ Mahendra Manjhi Resident of Village- Nonfarawa Dhangar Toli, Police Station- Patahi, District - East Champaran. 3.

Budhiya Devi Wife of Sahdev Manjhi Resident of Village- Nonfarawa Dhangar Toli, Police Station- Patahi, District - East Champaran. 4.

Suraj Manjhi @ Suraj Kumar Son of Bikau Manjhi Resident of VillageNonfarawa Dhangar Toli, Police Station- Patahi, District - East Champaran. 5.

Pradeep Manjhi @ Pradish Kumar Son of Basant Manjhi Resident of Village- Nonfarawa Dhangar Toli, Police Station- Patahi, District - East Champaran.

6.

Rudal Manjhi @ Rudal Kumar Son of Ramawatar Manjhi Resident of Village- Nonfarawa Dhangar Toli, Police Station- Patahi, District - East Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ajay Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Renuka Ratnakar (App 125) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-06-2026 1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 221, 132, 324(4), 352, 190, 191 and 45 of BNS and Sections 30(a), 30(b), 30(c) and 41 of the Bihar Excise Act.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36953 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026 2/3 petitioners are person with clean antecedent and petitioner no. 3 is a woman and allegation is of recovery of 30 litres of liquor and 500 litres of raw liquor from the house of Anita Devi and 20 litres of liquor from the house of Neha Devi. 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from their conscious possession and even the alleged recovery is from the houses of Anita Devi and Neha Devi, with whom petitioners have no concern or relation. It is next submitted that petitioners came to be implicated with an allegation that they obstructed the police in discharge of their official duties and even damaged the government vehicle. It is further submitted that from perusal of the allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that allegations are general and omnibus in nature.

5.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

6.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the event of their 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) each

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36953 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026 3/3 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 Patahi P.S. Case No. 107 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. 7.

It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the event if it is found that petitioners have antecedent of even one case then it would be presumed that petitioners, for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed their antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed with respect to that petitioner who had concealed his criminal antecedent before this Court, but after verification if it is found that petitioners are person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T