Patna High Court

AJEET KUMAR @ AJEET SINGHversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 21 January 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents.

Summary

The petitioner, Ajeet Kumar, feared arrest in a case registered under Sections 30(a), 30(c), 30(d) and 30(g) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 43 litres of liquor from a kiln. He contended that he was not in possession of the liquor, was not the owner of the kiln, and was implicated solely on the complaint of a hostile chowkidar without any proper investigation. The State opposed his application for anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and appear before the trial court within six weeks. The order further directed that the trial court verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents and, if more than one prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional bail would be confirmed.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under the circumstances of the excise case.
Whether the petitioner’s alleged antecedent cases affect the grant of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
excise law
liquor seizure
criminal procedure
Bihar Excise Act
Section 482
bail conditions

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1589 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-211 Year-2025 Thana- KACCHWA District- Rohtas
                 ======================================================
                 AJEET KUMAR @ AJEET SINGH S/o- Janeshwar Singh @ Lorik Singh
                 Resident of Village- Balev Tola Police Station- Kachchawa District- Rohtas

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Raghunandan Kumar Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   21-01-2026                  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 Sections 30(a),

                   30(c), 30(d) and 30(g) 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 43 liters of liquor from a kiln.

                                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 kiln and he came to be implicated at the instance of

                   Chowkidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is also

                   submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1589 of 2026(2) dt.21-01-2026
                                            2/3




          excise, the police starts implicating mechanically either at the

          instance of Chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or

          secret information without holding a proper investigation.

                       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.

          5,000/- (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

          Kachchawa P.S. Case No. 211 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 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
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1589 of 2026(2) dt.21-01-2026
                                                        3/3




                      verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one

                      case 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…