Patna High Court
Dilip kumar @ Dileep KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to bail‑bond conditions and verification of his antecedent.
Summary
Dilip Kumar applied for anticipatory bail in a case under Sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 1,209.6 litres of liquor from his pick‑up vehicle. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of seizure, and was unaware that the vehicle would be misused. The State opposed the bail. The Patna High Court, applying Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C., directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of his antecedent. The court clarified that if any prior case is discovered, the provisional bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed. The application for anticipatory bail was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case under the Excise Act.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 41(1)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- liquor seizure
- Section 438 Cr.P.C.
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10720 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-67 Year-2024 Thana- TURKAULIYA District- East Champaran
======================================================
Dilip kumar @ Dileep Kumar Son of Nathuni Prasad Resident of Village -
Purani Bazar, Sugar Mill Road, P.S. - Narkatiyaganj, Dist. - West Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Abhishek Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar No. 2
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 24-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is
of recovery of 1209.6 litres of liquor from a pick-up vehicle.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and he came to be
implicated based on the fact that he is owner of the seized
vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use
his own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would create
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10720 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026
2/3
evidence against himself and hence, would get implicated. It is
further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that
Munna would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged as he
was also apprehended at the spot.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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
Turkauliya P. S. Case No.67 of 2024, 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 petitioner shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, then it
would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10720 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026
3/3
anticipatory bail had concealed his 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 is a person with clean antecedent, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.