Patna High Court
Dharmendra Kumar @ Dharmendra Kumar Sahani @ Dharmendr KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bond, sureties and verification of criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Dharmendra Kumar, applied for anticipatory bail in a case alleging recovery of 8.640 litres of liquor and offences under Sections 272 and 273 of the IPC and Sections 30(a), 41 and 45 of the Excise Act. He argued that he was not arrested at the spot, no liquor was found in his possession, and that the allegation arose from a dispute with a watchman. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after hearing both sides, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties, subject to Section 438(2) of the CrPC. The order also conditioned the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent and to cancel the bail if more than one prior case is found. The application for anticipatory bail was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC in view of the alleged offences under the IPC and Excise Act.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 41, 45
- Indian Penal Code — s. 272, 273
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- IPC offences
- Excise Act
- liquor seizure
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17282 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-119 Year-2024 Thana- BANJARIA District- East Champaran
======================================================
Dharmendra Kumar @ Dharmendra Kumar Sahani @ Dharmendr Kumar S/o
Uma Sahani R/o vill- Jhakiya, Ps- Banjariya, District- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajesh Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Suman Kumari Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 16-04-2026 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
Sections 272 and 273 of the I.P.C. and Sections 30(a), 41 and 45
of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of
recovery of 8.640 litres of liquor from a shop.
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
and he came to be implicated at the instance of Chaukidar with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17282 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
2/3
whom he is on an inimical term. It is also submitted that it is not
the case of the prosecution that petitioner was indulging in trade
of liquor rather is alleged that he created ruckus when accused
were apprehended.
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 Banjariya P. S. Case No.119 of 2024, 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
found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one case, then
it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17282 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
3/3
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…