Patna High Court

Domi Dharikar @ Domi DhanikarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 9 March 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to bond, sureties and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.

Summary

The petitioner, Domi Dharikar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of 36 litres of liquor from a location adjacent to his house. He argued he had a clean antecedent and that the alleged recovery was not from his possession, relying on a confessional statement of another accused in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. If any prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional order would be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the Bihar Negotiable Securities Act.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the allegation is based solely on a confessional statement of an accused in custody.
Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent warrants provisional anticipatory bail under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.

Legislation cited

Bihar Negotiable Securities Act — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Bihar Excise Act
confessional statement
clean antecedent
Section 30(a)
Section 482(2)
provisional bail

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12779 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-254 Year-2025 Thana- MADHEPUR District- Madhubani
                 ======================================================
                 Domi Dharikar @ Domi Dhanikar S/o Late Kamal Dharikar @ Kamal
                 Dhanikar R/o Village - Laxmipur, P.S - Madhepur, District - Madhubani

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Baleshwar Kamat, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Dilip Kumar No. 1, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   09-03-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

                   registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Excise Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 36 liters of liquor from a place behind the house of

                   the petitioner.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing

                   was recovered from his conscious possession and even alleged

                   recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner,

                   but then is adjacent to his house and he came to be implicated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12779 of 2026(2) dt.09-03-2026
                                            2/3




          based on confessional statement of apprehended accused in

          police custody which does not have any evidentiary value. It it

          reiterated and submitted that petitioner is a person with clean

          antecedent.

                       5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

          anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                       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 Trial Court

          within a period of six weeks from today, be released on

          Provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds 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

          Madhepur P.S. Case No. 254 of 2025 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 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 seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his

          antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12779 of 2026(2) dt.09-03-2026
                                                        3/3




                      anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after

                      verification if 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)
Rishabh/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…