Patna High Court

Piyajo Dom @ Ajad KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 22 January 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent, as the allegations were not supported by possession or strong evidence.

Summary

The petitioner, Piyajo Dom @ Ajad Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act concerning the alleged recovery of 600 litres of liquor from a jute bag. He argued that he had no possession of the liquor, the alleged location was not his property, and the case was based solely on a confessional statement of another accused in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail. The Court, noting the petitioner’s clean antecedent and the weak evidential basis, granted provisional anticipatory bail on a bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent by the trial court. If any antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed forthwith.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
Whether the confessional statement of another accused provides sufficient basis to deny anticipatory bail.

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Bihar Excise Act
Section 30
clean antecedent
confessional statement
provisional bail
Section 482

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1706 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-805 Year-2019 Thana- ALAMGANJ District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Piyajo Dom @ Ajad Kumar S/O Manil Ram @ Munil Ram R/O Meena Bazar
                 Harijan Colony Sampatchak, P.S- Gulzarbagh, Distt.- Patna.
                                                                             ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                  Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                      ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Nitish Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   22-01-2026                  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

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 600 liters of liquor from a Jute bag.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing was

                   recovered from his conscious possession even alleged recovery is

                   from a place which does not belong to the petitioner and is accessible

                   to villagers at large and he came to be implicated based on

                   confessional statement of apprehended accused in police custody

                   which does not have any evidentiary value.

                                5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1706 of 2026(2) dt.22-01-2026
                                                        2/2




                      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. 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 Alamganj P.S. Case No. 805 of 2019 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 even 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 confirmed,

                      but after verification if it is found that petitioner is a person with

                      clean antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order

                      shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                              (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…