Patna High Court
Prince Kumar PandeyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that provisional anticipatory bail may be granted subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, and if more than one antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed.
Summary
Prince Kumar Pandey was charged under Sections 30(a), 32(i)(iii) and 41(i)(ii) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 72.280 litres of liquor from a vehicle he owned. He argued that he was not present at the spot of seizure, had no conscious possession of the liquor and was unaware that his friend misused the vehicle. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, contending that the defect pointed out by the office had been removed. The court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish bail bonds and two sureties, and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedent. The order stipulated that if more than one prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in the excise case.
- Whether the defect identified by the office has been removed.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- seizure of liquor
- vehicle ownership
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1293 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-564 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Kaimur (Bhabua)
======================================================
Prince Kumar Pandey S/o Dinesh Pandey Resident of Village- Jahanabad
Kudra, P.S.- Kudra, District- Kaimur at Bhabua
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Uday Pratap Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Meena Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 26-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
defect as pointed out by the office, stands removed.
3. In view of the submission made by learned counsel
for the petitioner, the defect as pointed out by the office is
hereby removed.
4. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a),
32(i)(iii) and 41(i)(ii) of the Bihar Excise Act.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 72.280 litres of liquor from a car.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1293 of 2026(3) dt.26-02-2026
2/3
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 an occurrence and thus would
create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,
it is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware
that his friend would misuse the vehicle in the manner as
alleged, who also fled from the spot.
7. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
8. 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.
5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) 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 Kaimur
Excise P.S. Case No. 564 of 2025, subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
9. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1293 of 2026(3) dt.26-02-2026
3/3
Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and
in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more
than 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
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one
case in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.