Patna High Court

Golu DhangarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 16 March 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to bond, sureties, and verification of antecedents, with confirmation contingent on the outcome of that verification.

Summary

The petitioner, Golu Dhangar, sought anticipatory bail in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of 3.75 litres of liquor. He argued that the liquor was seized from a public place, not from his possession, and that his name was not mentioned in the FIR, casting doubt on the prosecution’s case. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offence. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to a Rs.5,000 bond, two sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents within six weeks. It directed that if more than one antecedent is found, the bail would not be confirmed; if only one antecedent exists, the provisional bail would be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, pending trial court verification.

Issues considered

The appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act where the alleged seizure was not from the petitioner's possession.
Whether the petitioner's prior criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Whether provisional anticipatory bail can be conditioned on verification of antecedents by the trial court.

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
excise offence
Section 30(a)
Section 482(2)
bail conditions
criminal antecedent
possession

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15542 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-424 Year-2021 Thana- BUDDHACOLONY District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Golu Dhangar S/o Prahlad Dhangar @ Prahlad Paswan R/O- Harijancolony,
                 China kothi, P.s- Budhacolony, District- Patna, Bihar

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                          ... ... Opposite Party
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Binay Kumar Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Md. Aslam Ansari, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   16-03-2026                     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 Excise Act.

                                   3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and

                   allegation is of recovery of 3.750 liters of liquor from a sack.

                                   4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was

                   recovered from his conscious possession and even alleged

                   recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner

                   and is accessible to public at large and he came to be implicated

                   at the instance of local persons but the name of the person who
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15542 of 2026(2) dt.16-03-2026
                                            2/3




          disclosed the name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the 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 within a period of six weeks

          from today, be released on Provisional anticipatory bail on

          furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5000/- (Rupees Five 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 Buddhacolony P.S. Case No. 424 of

          2021 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 more

          than 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 has only one antecedent,
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15542 of 2026(2) dt.16-03-2026
                                                       3/3




                     in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be

                     confirmed forthwith.



                                               (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…