Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Manorath Kumar Vs the State of Bihar — Quashing and FIR | Patna HC (2023)

Home
Patna HC
2023
Manorath Kumar Vs the State of BiharManorath Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Dismissed

Manorath Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC7 Nov 2023CR. MISC./72181/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 explicitly prohibits entertainments of applications under Section 438 Cr.P.C. relating to offences under the Act. Consequently, the petitioner's application was declared not maintainable and disposed of.

What did the court decide?

The application for anticipatory bail (Section 438 CrPC) was declared not maintainable and the application stands disposed of.

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

The application for anticipatory bail (Section 438 CrPC) was declared not maintainable and the application stands disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is maintainable when Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 creates an embargo.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 imposes a legislative bar on the grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC for offences under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. Applications filed pursuant to Section 438 regarding such offences are not maintainable in the High Court.

A compact analysis

This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.

A

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72181 of 2023

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-114 Year-2023 Thana- DHARHARA District- Munger

======================================================

MANORATH KUMAR SON OF ANIK YADAV RESIDENT OF VILLAGEMAHULIYA, PS- CHANAN, DISTT- LAKHISARAI

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR

... ... Opposite Party/s

====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Amrendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anil Kumar Singh No. 1

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY

ORAL ORDER

2 07-11-2023

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

learned APP for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest for the offences alleged under Section 30(a)/32 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 registered in connection with Dharhara P.S.Case No.114 of 2023.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is a person of clean antecedent. Nothing was recovered from his possession.

Be that as it may, Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 makes an explicit embargo on entertaining the application under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. hence it is not maintainable.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72181 of 2023(2) dt.07-11-2023 2/2

If the petitioner surrenders and seeks regular bail before the court below, that shall be disposed of on its own merit on the same day, without being prejudiced by this order. The learned court below may take notice of the fact that the petitioner is a person of clean antecedent and nothing was recovered from his possession.

With these observations, the application stands disposed of.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)

HR/-

U T

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is maintainable when Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 creates an embargo.

Statutes considered

3 provisions across 3 enactments

AI extract

Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 201676(2)
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973438
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 202230(a)/32

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Manorath Kumar
respondent
The State of Bihar

Coram

AI extract

Nawneet Kumar Pandey

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Patna HC
Decided on: 7 Nov 2023 · November
Registered: 19 Oct 2023
Case no.: CR. MISC./72181/2023
CNR: BRHC010960092023
Topic: Quashing and FIR
Bench: Nawneet Kumar Pandey
Disposal: DISPOSED

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Nawneet Kumar Pandey

Ashok Harijan @ Ashok Ram Vs the State of Bihar
3 Nov 2023
Guddu Yadav @ Guddu Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Bihar
3 Nov 2023
Md. Wasim Vs The State of Bihar
3 Nov 2023
Vivek Kumar @ Vivek Kumar Suman Vs The State of Bihar
7 Nov 2023
Shankar Ram @ Shankar Paswan Vs The State of Bihar
7 Nov 2023
Sonu Yadav Vs the State of Bihar
7 Nov 2023

Cite this judgement

Manorath Kumar v. the State of Bihar, CR. MISC./72181/2023 (PAT), decided on 7 November 2023.

The Patna High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes3

Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 201676(2)
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973438
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 202230(a)/32

View all statutes

Bench / Coram

Nawneet Kumar Pandey

Parties & counsel