Patna High Court
Ram Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, subject to bail bonds, sureties and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents.
Summary
Ram Kumar Singh applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of 74.4 litres of liquor from a bush adjacent to his house. The petitioner argued that he was not arrested, no liquor was found in his possession, and the alleged recovery was from property not owned by him, alleging reliance on secret information. 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.5,000 each with two sureties, subject to the conditions of Section 438(2) CrPC. The order also stipulated that the trial court verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents and could withdraw the bail if more than one prior case is found. The anticipatory bail application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the absence of arrest and lack of possession of the alleged contraband affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
- What conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC must be imposed on anticipatory bail in such circumstances.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
- secret information
- recovery of liquor
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16291 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-29 Year-2026 Thana- RAHIKA District- Madhubani
======================================================
Ram Kumar Singh Son of Bihari Singh Resident of Village- Khasmahal
Dumari, P.S.- Rahika, Dist.- Madhubani, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Jha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ram Sumiran Rai
======================================================
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 has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 74.400 litres of liquor from a
bush situated behind the house of the petitioner.
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, but then, is adjacent to his house and he came to be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16291 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
2/3
implicated based on secret information, which is the easiest way
to implicate someone. It is next submitted that police in majority
of cases implicating innocent persons either at the behest of
Chaukidar, local person, secret information and confessional
statement in a mechanical manner without holding a proper
investigation.
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.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 Rahika P. S. Case No.29 of 2026, 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.16291 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
3/3
found that petitioner has antecedent of more than 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 has antecedent of one case only, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…