Patna High Court
Sandeep MukhiyaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, subject to bond, sureties and verification of antecedents under Section 438(2) CrPC.
Summary
The petitioner, Sandeep Mukhiya, applied for anticipatory bail in a case registered under Sections 274 and 275 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Section 30(a) of the Excise Act, alleging recovery of 72 litres of liquor from a river bank. He argued that he was not arrested at the spot, no liquor was found in his possession, and that a watchman (chaukidar) with whom he has a personal enmity implicated him. The State opposed the bail, citing the seriousness of the offences and the petitioner’s two prior cases under the Excise Act. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties, subject to Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and a verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. The order further stipulated that if more than two prior cases are found, the bail would not be confirmed; if only two are confirmed, the bail would be affirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in offences punishable under Sections 274 and 275 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent of two Excise Act cases bars the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the absence of possession of the alleged contraband and the alleged personal enmity with the chaukidar affect the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 274, 275
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- Narcotic offences
- prior criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18573 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-28 Year-2026 Thana- CHANPATIA District- West Champaran
======================================================
Sandeep Mukhiya, S/O SRI SUKAT MUKHIYA Resident Of Village -
Basantpur, P.S- Sathi, Dist- West Chamaparan
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sharad Kumar Verma
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Indu Kumari Srivastava
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 01-04-2026 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 274 and 275 of the B.N.S. and Section 30(a) of the
Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 72 litres of liquor from bank of a
river Sikrahna.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18573 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
2/3
and is accessible to public at large and he came to be implicated
at the instance of Chaukidar with whom he is on an inimical
term. It is further submitted that if Chaukidar was aware of the
involvement of the petitioners in the occurrence, then why he
did not inform the police prior to institution of the present F.I.R.,
which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is
next submitted that police in majority of cases implicating
innocent persons either at the behest of Chaukidar, local person,
secret information and confessional statement in a mechanical
manner without holding a proper investigation.
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.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 Chanpatia P. S. Case No.28 of 2026, subject to the
conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18573 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
3/3
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 two cases,
then it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of
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 two cases only, in that event,
the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed
forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…