Patna High Court
Arjun PaswanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that provisional anticipatory bail may be granted subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent and compliance with conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
Arjun Paswan applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act alleging recovery of 6.8 litres of liquor. The petitioner argued that he has a clean antecedent, was not arrested at the spot, and the alleged liquor was recovered from a public place, with the complainant being a hostile chaukidar. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of his antecedent by the trial court. The court clarified that if any antecedent is discovered, the provisional bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438(2) CrPC in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of arrest justify granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
- bail bond
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16080 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-311 Year-2025 Thana- SAHPUR District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Arjun Paswan S/O Sudama Paswan R/O Vill.- Rani Sagar, P.S.- Shahpur,
Dist.- Bhojpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vivek Kunwar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Lakshmi Kant Sharma
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is
of recovery of 6.8 litres of liquor from a place near bank of Kher
river.
4. The 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16080 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
2/3
at the instance of Chaukidar with whom he is on an inimical
term. It is further submitted that if Chaukidar was aware of the
involvement of the petitioners in the occurrence, then why he
did not inform the police prior to institution of the present F.I.R.,
which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution, when
admittedly petitioner is a person with clean antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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 Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum 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
Shahpur P. S. Case No.311 of 2025, subject to the conditions
laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16080 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
3/3
found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, then it
would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining
anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court,
in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall
not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…