Patna High Court
Nitish KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to verification of their antecedents.
Summary
The petitioners, Nitish Kumar and Anil Kumar Chaudhary, feared arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly possessing 15 litres of liquor recovered from a motorcycle. They argued they had clean antecedents, were not in actual possession, and were not owners of the seized vehicle, contending that a chowkidar who implicated them failed to inform police earlier. The State opposed their request for anticipatory bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on the petitioners furnishing bail bonds and sureties, and directed verification of their criminal antecedents. It further stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would be withdrawn for that petitioner, otherwise the provisional order would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioners have a clean criminal antecedent warranting bail.
- Whether the petitioners can be deemed owners or in possession of the seized liquor.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- liquor seizure
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
- Section 30
- Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16103 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-121 Year-2025 Thana- KASMA District- Aurangabad
======================================================
1. Nitish Kumar S/o- Nirmohi Chaudhary Village- Bishambharpur Ps- Kasma
Dist- Aurangabad
2. Anil Kumar Chaudhary S/o- Satyendra Chaudhary Village- Bishambharpur
Ps- Kasma Dist- Aurangabad
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms.Mukul Kumari
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Syed Mojibur Rahman
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 16-04-2026 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) 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 15 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.
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 motorcycle and they came to be implicated at the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16103 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
2/3
instance of Chowkidar with whom they is on an inimical term.
It is next submitted that if Chowkidar was aware about the
involvement of the petitioners in the occurrence, then why he
did not inform the police prior to institution of the instant 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 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 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 Kasma P.S. Case No. 121 of 2025, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section Section 482(2) of the
BNSS.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16103 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
3/3
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
event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed
forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…