Patna High Court

Raja KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 3 April 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to bond, sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents.

Summary

The petitioner, Raja Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after a FIR was lodged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act alleging that 164.160 litres of liquor were recovered from a Tata Magic vehicle. He contended that he was not in possession of the liquor, was not the owner of the vehicle, and was implicated through a hostile watchman (Chowkidar) who failed to inform police earlier. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offence and the petitioner’s prior criminal record. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a Rs.20,000 bond with two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents within six weeks. If more than four prior cases are found, the bail will be revoked; if only four, the provisional bail will be confirmed.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in a case under the Bihar Excise Act.
Whether the petitioner’s alleged lack of possession and ownership of the seized vehicle negates the charge.
Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail.

Subjects

anticipatory bail
excise offence
Section 30
Section 482
Bihar Excise Act
criminal antecedent
seizure of liquor

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15108 of 2026
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-234 Year-2025 Thana- SARAI RANJAN District- Samastipur
                 ======================================================
                 Raja Kumar Son of Umesh Ray @ Umesh Rai @ Shital Rai @ Shital Ray
                 Resident of Meyari, Vajitpur Meyari, Bazidpur Meari, Bajitpur Meari, P.S.-
                 Sarairanjan, District- Samastipur, Bihar.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Keshav Bhardwaj, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Bharat Lal, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   03-04-2026                  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 has antecedent of four cases out of which three cases

                   are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of

                   164.160 liters of liquor from a Tata Magic vehicle.

                                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 is not the

                   owner of the seized vehicle and he came to be implicated at the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15108 of 2026(2) dt.03-04-2026
                                            2/3




          instance of Chowkidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is

          next submitted that if Chowkidar was aware of the involvement

          of the petitioner in the occurrence then why he did not inform

          the police prior to institution of the instant FIR which casts an

          aspersion on the case of the prosecution.

                       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.

          20000/- (Rupees Twenty 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

          Sarairanjan P.S. Case No. 234 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 more than four

          cases 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
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15108 of 2026(2) dt.03-04-2026
                                                        3/3




                      confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner has

                      antecedent of four cases only, 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…