Patna High Court
Sandeep KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to provisional anticipatory bail, subject to bond, sureties, and verification of his criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Sandeep Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, involving alleged recovery of 110 litres of liquor from a motorcycle. He argued that the seizure was not from his conscious possession, he was not the vehicle owner, and the case was based on secret information without proper investigation. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offence and the petitioner’s prior two excise cases. The Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent within six weeks. It further directed that if more than two prior cases are found, the bail would not be confirmed, whereas confirmation would follow if only two prior cases are verified.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior two excise cases affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act (B.N.S.S.) are applicable to the anticipatory bail order.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise offence
- Section 30
- Section 438
- criminal antecedent
- provisional bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15013 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-187 Year-2024 Thana- LACHHUAR District- Jamui
======================================================
Sandeep Kumar Son of Balmiki Yadav Resident of Village- Panchmahua PS
-Sikandra District -Jamui
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bipin Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Gauri Shankar Gupta, A.P.P.
======================================================
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.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 110 litres of liquor from a
motorcycle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted
that petitioner is not the owner of the seized vehicle and came to
be implicated based on the secret information which the easiest
way to implicate someone. It is next submitted that once an
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15013 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
2/3
accused is implicated in a case relating to excise the police start
implicating mechanically either at the instance of the
Chawkidar, local person, secret information or confessional
statement without holding a proper investigation of the case.
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, let 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.10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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 Lachhaur P.S. Case No. 187 of 2024,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of
the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial
Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if
it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than two cases,
it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15013 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
3/3
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner has antecedent of only two cases in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…