Rajesh Manjhi @ Rajesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86076 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-177 Year-2020 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. District- Nalanda ====================================================== Rajesh Manjhi @ Rajesh Kumar, Gender, Male, aged about 37 years, Son of Late Somari Manjhi Resident of Village- Mayapur Mushari, P.S.- Katrisarai in the district of Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Sunil Kumar, Advocate Ms. Riya Kashyap, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Ram Bilash Roy Raman, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 18-12-2025 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with Excise Case No. 177C3ex/2020 registered for the offence(s) punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, a raid was conducted by the Excise Officer and 18.75 litres of illicit liquor and 7.5 litres of beer were recovered near the house of the petitioner. The FIR was lodged on the basis of the said information in the year 2020.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86076 of 2025(2) dt.18-12-2025 2/3 petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submitted that neither the illicit liquor was recovered from the possession of the petitioner, nor from the house of the petitioner but merely on suspicion, he has been implicated in the present case because of the reason that house of the petitioner is situated in the said lane, although house of several other persons are situated in the same lane and, as such, the petitioner was not aware of the information that he has been made accused in the present case. He further submitted that prior to the present case, petitioner had clean antecedent but after implication in the present case, the petitioner has been made accused in another case, in which he is on bail.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
6. Having considered the rival submissions made on behalf of the parties, as well as, having perused the allegation made in the FIR, I am of the opinion that petitioner has, prima facie, made out a case to be released on pre-arrest bail.
7. The petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned District Court within a period of four weeks
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86076 of 2025(2) dt.18-12-2025 3/3 from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Concerned Court where the case is pending in connection with Excise Case No. 177C3ex/2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
8. The learned District Court is directed to verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if it is found that the petitioner is involved in some other cases, as what has been stated in paragraph no.3 of the bail application, this order will automatically lose its force.
(Purnendu Singh, J) Sanjay/- U T