Patna High Court

Ajay Nut @ Ajay NatversusThe State of Bihar

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

Holding

Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to bond, sureties, and verification of criminal antecedents.

Summary

The petitioner, Ajay Nut, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act concerning the alleged recovery of 560 litres of liquor from a public pond. He argued that the liquor was not in his possession, the site did not belong to him, and the complaint was filed by a hostile chowkidar who had not reported the matter earlier. The State opposed the bail. The Court 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 also stipulated that the trial court verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents; if more than one prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed, otherwise it will be confirmed immediately.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in the case registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act
Whether the circumstances, including lack of possession and public nature of the alleged site, justify granting bail

Subjects

anticipatory bail
excise law
Section 30
liquor seizure
criminal antecedent
bail conditions

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16106 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-255 Year-2025 Thana- PANAPUR District- Saran
                 ======================================================
                 Ajay Nut @ Ajay Nat S/O Birendra Nut R/V Bagdiha, P.S.- Panapur, Dist-
                 Saran.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Sanjeet Kumar Singh
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Ms.Sharda Kumari
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   16-04-2026               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 Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of

                   recovery of 560 litres of liquor from a place near bank of a

                   pond.

                             4.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was

                   recovered from his conscious possession and even the 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.16106 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
                                            2/3




          at the instance of Chowkidar with whom he is on an inimical

          term. It is next submitted that if Chowkidar was aware about

          the involvement of the petitioner 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 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 Panapur P.S. Case No.

          255 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
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16106 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
                                                          3/3




                        confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner has

                        antecedent of one case in that event the provisional anticipatory

                        bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…