Patna High Court
Surendra Prasad SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent and compliance with the stipulated conditions.
Summary
Surendra Prasad Singh applied for anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case alleging recovery of 6,831 litres of liquor from a truck, alleged offences under Sections 30(a), 32(i)(ii), 36 and 41(i)(ii) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022. The petitioner argued that he has a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the seized liquor, is not the owner of the vehicle, and that the confessional statement of a co‑accused lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail. The Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., pending verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. If a prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if the antecedent is clean, the bail will be confirmed. The order was pronounced by Justice Satyavrat Verma.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether the confessional statement of a co‑accused is admissible for granting anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged clean antecedent warrants provisional anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- prohibition act
- liquor seizure
- confessional statement
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16648 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-122 Year-2024 Thana- BEGUSARAI MUFFASIL District-
Begusarai
======================================================
Surendra Prasad Singh Son of Ram Sunder Prasad Singh R/o Village -
Pusaho, P.S. - Bithan, Dist. - Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shubhesh Pandey, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 06-04-2026 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 Sections 30(a),
32(i)(ii), 36 and 41(i)(ii) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise
(Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 6831 litres of liquor from a truck.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted
that petitioner is not the owner of the seized vehicle and came to
be implicated based on the confessional statement of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16648 of 2026(3) dt.06-04-2026
2/3
apprehended accused in police custody which does not have any
evidentiary value in the eye of law. It is next submitted that no
doubt, it has also been alleged that petitioner was talking to the
co-accused, namely, Raj Kumar Ranjan but then Raj Kumar
Ranjan is a co-villager and when he was apprehended he called
on the mobile of the wife of the petitioner so that she informs
his wife that he has been arrested.
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 appearing on behalf of 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.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 Begusarai Mufassil
P.S. Case No. 122 of 2024, 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. However, 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 even one case,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16648 of 2026(3) dt.06-04-2026
3/3
it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…