Patna High Court
Gautam KumarversusTh State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his antecedent and compliance with the conditions under Sections 438(2) Cr.P.C. and 482(2) B.N.S.S.
Summary
Gautam Kumar was accused under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for allegedly possessing 3.375 litres of liquor recovered from his shop premises, which he claims was actually located in a joint family house and not in his conscious possession. He applied for anticipatory bail, arguing that he has a clean antecedent, that the liquor was not recovered from his shop, and that the FIR lacks details of the informant. The State opposed the bail. The Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and conditioned on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. If any antecedent is found, the bail may be cancelled; otherwise, it will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the Bihar Narcotic and Smuggling (B.N.S.S.) Act.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether the alleged recovery of liquor from a joint family property establishes possession sufficient to deny anticipatory bail.
- Whether the lack of an informant’s name in the FIR affects the prosecution’s case for denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- joint family property
- possession
- clean antecedent
- Cr.P.C. Section 438
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15460 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-445 Year-2025 Thana- VISHNUPAD District- Gaya
======================================================
Gautam Kumar S/o Rambriksh Vishwakrama R/o village- Lakhanpura, P.S.-
Vishnupad, District- Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
Th State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vinod Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mritunjay Kumar Nirala, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 16-03-2026 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 is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 3.375 litres of liquor from the shop of the petitioner.
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 came to be implicated based on the fact that
liquor is alleged to have been recovered from the premises of
his house in which the shop is located but then the recovery was
not from the shop. It is next submitted that the house in question
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15460 of 2026(2) dt.16-03-2026
2/3
is a joint family property, as such, it cannot be alleged with
certainty that it was the petitioner who had kept the liquor in the
house or the liquor kept in the house was within his knowledge.
It is also submitted that petitioner came to be implicated at the
instance of the local person 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 has not been implicated based on the secret
information.
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.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 Vishnupad P.S. Case No. 445 of 2025,
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15460 of 2026(2) dt.16-03-2026
3/3
Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if
it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, 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 shall not be
confirmed but if it is found on verification that petitioner is a
person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…