Patna High Court
Sudin Kumar Ram @ Sudin RamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to surrender, bail bonds, and verification of antecedents, with confirmation contingent on the outcome of that verification.
Summary
Sudin Kumar Ram sought anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, alleging recovery of 7.875 litres of liquor from a mango orchard not owned by him. He argued that he was not caught in possession and that the investigation relied on secret information without proper inquiry. The State opposed the bail. The Court, considering the petitioner's submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that he surrender within six weeks, furnish bail bonds of Rs.5,000 with two sureties, and comply with Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. The order also directed verification of his criminal antecedents, stating that if more than one antecedent is found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed immediately.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether the alleged recovery of liquor from a location not owned by the petitioner justifies denial of bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- Section 30
- Criminal Procedure Code
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
- liquor recovery
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16598 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-14 Year-2026 Thana- BALIGAON District- Vaishali
======================================================
Sudin Kumar Ram @ Sudin Ram S/O Mahavir Ram Resident of Village-
Mehashi, P.S- Sakra, Distt.- Muzaffapur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anish Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Sangeeta Sharma, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-03-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 7.875 litres of liquor from a mango
orchard.
4. 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 the alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
and he came to be implicated based on the secret information
which is the easiest way to implicated someone. It is further
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16598 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
2/3
submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to
excise the police start implicating mechanically either at the
instance of the Chawkidar, local person, secret information or
confessional statement without holding a proper investigation of
the case.
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, let the petitioner, above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender 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 Baligaon P.S. Case No. 14 of 2026,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of
the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial
Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if
it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one case,
it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16598 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
3/3
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner has antecedent of only one case in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…