Patna High Court
Pramod SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The High Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to bail bond, sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
The petitioner, Pramod Singh, sought anticipatory bail in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of 180 litres of liquor from a bamboo orchard adjacent to his house. He argued that he was not arrested at the spot, no liquor was found in his possession, and the recovery occurred on land not owned by him, contending that the investigation was based on secret information without proper inquiry. The State opposed the bail, highlighting the petitioner's antecedent of eight prior cases, six of which relate to the Excise Act. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, requiring a bail bond of Rs. 40,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner's criminal antecedent and compliance with conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The order stipulates that if more than eight antecedent cases are found, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed after verification.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act given the petitioner's criminal antecedent.
- Whether the alleged recovery of liquor from property adjacent to the petitioner’s house justifies arrest and denial of bail.
- Whether the trial court must verify the petitioner’s antecedent before confirming anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- Section 30(a)
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
- Bihar Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17756 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-734 Year-2025 Thana- DHAKA District- East Champaran
======================================================
Pramod Singh S/O Chaneshar Singh @ Chandradeo singh Vill.- Badki Gahai,
P.S.- Dhaka, District- East champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Manoj Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Sucheta Yadav
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 19-03-2026 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 the
petitioner has antecedent of eight cases out of which six cases
are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 180
litres of liquor from a bamboo orchard near the house of the
petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and even the alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17756 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
2/3
but then is adjacent to his house and he came to be implicated
based on secret information which is the easiest way to
implicate someone. It is further submitted that once an accused
is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police starts
implicating mechanically either at the instance of Chowkidar,
local person, confessional statement or secret information
without holding a proper investigation. It is also submitted that
petitioner earlier also in similar manner came to be implicated in
cases relating to Excise.
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.
40,000/- (Rupees Forty 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 Dhaka
P.S. Case No. 734 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17756 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
3/3
Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and
in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more
than eight cases 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 has antecedent of eight
case in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…