Patna High Court
Sudhir Kumar Jaiswal @ Sudhir JaiswalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to bail bonds, sureties, and verification of their criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioners, Sudhir Kumar Jaiswal and Chandan Kumar Jaiswal, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, alleging that the liquor was recovered from a bag not in their possession and that the complaint was motivated by an inimical chawkidar. They argued that no material was seized from them and that the police had not conducted a proper investigation. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. The order also directed verification of the petitioners' criminal antecedents, with confirmation of bail contingent on the findings.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016
- Whether the alleged recovery of liquor from a bag not in the petitioners' possession justifies denial of bail
- Whether the petitioners' prior criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- Section 30
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- criminal antecedent
- police investigation
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18174 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-114 Year-2026 Thana- MADHAURAH District- Saran
======================================================
1. Sudhir Kumar Jaiswal @ Sudhir Jaiswal Son of Late Omprakash Jaiswal
Resident of Village - Mrzapur, P.S.- Marhowrah, District - Saran.
2. Chandan Kumar Jaiswal @ Chandan Jaiswal Son of Late Manoj Jaiswal
Resident of Village - Mirzapur, P.S.- Marhowrah, District - Saran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Mili Kumari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 25-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 12.54 litres of liquor from a bag.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from their conscious possession and even the alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the
petitioners and they have no concern with the bag. It is further
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18174 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
2/3
submitted that petitioners came to be implicated at the instance
of the Chawkidar with whom they are on an inimical term. It is
next submitted that if the Chawkidar was aware of the
involvement of the petitioners in the occurrence then why he did
not inform the police prior to the institution of the instant FIR
which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is
also submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case
relating to excise the police start implicating mechanically either
at the instance of the Chawkidar, local person, confessional
statement or secret information without holding a proper
investigation of the case.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, let the petitioners, above-named, in
the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six
weeks from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail
on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)
each 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 Marhowrah P.S. Case No. 114 of 2026,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18174 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
3/3
the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned
Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners
and if it is found that petitioners have antecedent of more than
two cases, it would be presumed that petitioners had concealed
their antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory
bail application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail
order shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioners have antecedent of only two cases in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…