Patna High Court

Rakesh Kumar @ GolaversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 17 March 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court held that, notwithstanding the State’s opposition, the petitioner is entitled to provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of his antecedent and compliance with the conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

Summary

The petitioner, Rakesh Kumar, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 50 litres of liquor from a motorcycle, with a scooty also seized. He asserted that he has a clean antecedent, was not arrested at the spot, and does not own the seized vehicles, contending that the FIR does not name the informant who identified him. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the petitioner's submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that he furnish a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedent. If any antecedent is discovered, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional order will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of possession of the seized vehicles justify the grant of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Bihar Excise Act
Section 30(a)
clean antecedent
provisional bail
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14918 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-38 Year-2026 Thana- MALSALAMI District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Rakesh Kumar @ Gola Son of Sanjivan Ray @ Sajivan Ray Resident of
                 village- Nurudinganj, Ps- Malsalami, Dist- patna P/A- Village- Sukumarpur,
                 Ps- Raghopur, Dist- Vaishali

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr.Mithilesh Kumar Arya
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   17-03-2026               1.    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned A.P.P. for the State, Sri Chandra Bhushan Prasad.

                             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 the

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 50 litres of liquor from a motorcycle and one scooty

                   was seized.

                             4.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was

                   recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of

                   any of the seized vehicles and he came to be implicated at the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14918 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
                                            2/3




          instance of local people, but then the name of the person, who

          disclosed the name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the FIR,

          which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution, when

          petitioner admittedlly 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 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 Malsalami P.S. Case No. 38 of 2026, 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 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
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14918 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
                                                          3/3




                        anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…