Patna High Court
Rajesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to verification of their criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioners, Rajesh Kumar and Guddu Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of 2,664 litres of liquor. They argued they have clean antecedents, were not arrested at the spot, did not own the seized vehicle, and were implicated solely on a confessional statement made by Gorkha Ram while in police custody, which they claimed lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioners’ criminal antecedents. If any antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed for that petitioner; otherwise, the provisional order will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under the Bihar Excise Act offences.
- Whether the confessional statement of Gorkha Ram made in police custody is admissible as evidence.
- Whether lack of ownership or possession of the seized vehicle justifies granting anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- liquor seizure
- confessional statement
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.155 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-350 Year-2023 Thana- GAURICHAK District- Patna
======================================================
1. Rajesh Kumar S/o Pramod Rai @ Pramod Kumar Resident of - Pachuchak,
Sultanpur, P.S - Danapur, District - Patna
2. Guddu Kumar @ Prince S/o Pramod Rai @ Pramod Kumar Resident of -
Pachuchak, Sultanpur, P.S - Danapur, District - Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ghanshyam Tiwary
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sunil Kumar Pandey
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 13-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a), 32(2)
(3), 36, 41(1)(2) of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 2664 litres of liquor from a container vehicle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners were not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from their conscious possession and are not the owner
of the seized vehicle and they came to be implicated based on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.155 of 2026(2) dt.13-01-2026
2/3
confessional statement of Gorkha Ram in police custody which
does not have any evidentiary value.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the
event of their 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.
500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) each 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
Gaurichak P.S. Case No. 350 of 2023, subject to the conditions
as laid down under Section Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court
shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the
event if it is found that petitioners have antecedent of even one
case then it would be presumed that petitioners, for the purposes of
seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed their antecedent before
this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not
be confirmed with respect to that petitioner who had concealed his
criminal antecedent before this Court, but after verification if it is
found that petitioners are person with clean antecedent in that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.155 of 2026(2) dt.13-01-2026
3/3
event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed
forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…