Patna High Court
Rajnish KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to bond, sureties and verification of antecedent, with confirmation only if the petitioner has at most one prior case.
Summary
The petitioner, Rajnish Kumar, feared arrest in a case under Sections 30(a), 30(c) and 30(d) of the Bihar Excise Act alleging recovery of liquor from two locations. He argued that he was not caught in the act, no liquor was seized from his possession, and the FIR did not disclose the informant, casting doubt on the prosecution’s case. The State opposed his prayer for anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on a bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. It directed that if the petitioner is found to have more than one prior case, the bail would not be confirmed; if only one prior case is found, the provisional bail would be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case under Sections 30(a), 30(c) and 30(d) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the absence of seizure from the petitioner’s possession and the non‑disclosure of the informant in the FIR affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether provisional anticipatory bail can be conditioned on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30
- criminal antecedent
- FIR
- secret informant
- provisional bail
- Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17094 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-267 Year-2025 Thana- GOGRI District- Khagaria
======================================================
Rajnish Kumar S/o- Kapildeo Yadav Resident Of Village- Ushri, Ps-Gogri,
Dist- Khagaria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jai Kishor Poddar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pradeep Narain Kumar, APP
======================================================
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 Sections 30(a),
30(c) and 30(d) of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 90 liters of liquor and 20 liters of
liquor from two different places situated at Ushri diyara.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended 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
and is accessible to villagers at large and he came to be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17094 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
2/3
implicated at the instance of Chowkidar and local person, but
then the name of the person who disclosed the name of the
petitioner is not disclosed in the FIR which casts an aspersion
on the case of the prosecution, when he has not been implicated
based on secret information.
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.
5000/- (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 Gogri
P.S. Case No. 267 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17094 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
3/3
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
verification if 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…