Patna High Court
Rajeev Kumar @ Rajeev RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the withdrawal of the anticipatory bail application for petitioner 2 and granted provisional anticipatory bail to petitioner 1 subject to conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC.
Summary
The petitioners Rajeev Kumar and Ranjan Paswan filed anticipatory bail applications in a case concerning alleged offences under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act. During pendency, Ranjan Paswan was arrested, and his counsel sought to withdraw his anticipatory bail application. The court permitted the withdrawal, dismissing the petition with respect to him. For Rajeev Kumar, the court examined his claim of no possession of the seized liquor, lack of direct evidence, and alleged procedural lapses, and granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs 10,000 bond, two sureties, and compliance with Section 438(2) CrPC. The order also directed verification of his criminal antecedent, with the bail to be cancelled if more than two prior cases are found.
Issues considered
- Whether the anticipatory bail application for petitioner 2 can be withdrawn after his arrest
- Whether petitioner 1 is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) CrPC for alleged offences under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act, considering his antecedents and the facts of the case
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- bail bond
- withdrawal of application
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17743 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-528 Year-2025 Thana- LALGANJ District- Vaishali
======================================================
1. Rajeev Kumar @ Rajeev Rai Son of Prem Rai Resident of village -
Khanjahachak, P.S.- Lalganj, District - Vaishali.
2. Ranjan Paswan @ Ranjan Kumar Son of Munnilal Paswan @ Munni
Paswan Resident of village - Khajauli urf Aurangabad, P.S.- Lalganj, District
- Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Bela Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 16-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners seeks
permission to withdraw the present anticipatory bail
application with respect to petitioner no.2, namely, Ranjan
Paswan @ Ranjan Kumar, as petitioner no.2, during
pendency of the anticipatory bail application, was arrested.
3. Permission is accorded.
4. Accordingly, instant petition is dismissed as
withdrawn with respect to petitioner no.2, namely, Ranjan
Paswan @ Ranjan Kumar.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17743 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
2/4
5. The petitioner no.1 seeks bail in anticipation of
his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable
under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that the petitioner has antecedent of two cases out of which
one case is under the Excise Act and allegation is of
recovery of 140 litres of liquor from diyara area along with
20000 litres of raw jawa which was destroyed at the spot.
7. 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 is accessible to public at large
and he came to be implicated at the instance of local person,
but the name of the person, who disclosed the name of the
petitioner is not disclosed in the F.I.R., which casts an
aspersion on the case of the prosecution, when petitioner
has not been based on secret information. It is also
submitted that it is seen that in majority of the cases the
police is implicating accused in cases relating to excise at
the instance of Chaukidar or local person without holding a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17743 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
3/4
proper investigation.
8. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
9. Considering the submissions made by the
learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner no.1,
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.10,000/- (Rupees
Ten 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 Lalganj P. S.
Case No.528 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down
under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
10. The application stands allowed.
11. 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 two cases, then it would be presumed that
petitioner for the purposes of obtaining anticipatory bail had
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17743 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
4/4
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 two cases only, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed
forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…