Gokhul Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49508 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-152 Year-2026 Thana- MALAHI District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.

Gokhul Manjhi S/o Sikandar Manjhi Resident Of Village- Ramsiriya Musahar Toli, P.S.- Malahi, District- East Champaran 2.

Pratima Devi W/o Vakil Manjhi Resident Of Village- Ramsiriya Musahar Toli, P.S.- Malahi, District- East Champaran 3.

Sarswati Devi W/o Mohan Manjhi Resident Of Village- Ramsiriya Musahar Toli, P.S.- Malahi, District- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Aditya Kumar Pandey For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rabindra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 21-07-2026 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 Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and petitioner no. 2 and 3 are women and allegation is of recovery of 15 litres of liquor from the house of petitioner no. 1, 20 litres of liquor from the house of petitioner no. 2 and 20 litres of liquor from the house of petitioner no. 3.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49508 of 2026(2) dt.21-07-2026 2/3 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 the houses in question are joint family property as such it cannot be alleged with certainty that it were petitioners who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within knowledge of the petitioners. 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 they came to be implicated at the instance of Chowkidar and local people but then it is submitted that it does not appear probable that local people and chowkidar would have known who had concealed the liquor in the house.

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. 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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49508 of 2026(2) dt.21-07-2026 3/3 court in connection with Malahi P.S. Case No. 152 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 more than 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 have antecedent of one case in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T