Patna High Court
Dharm KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that provisional anticipatory bail may be granted subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent and compliance with the stipulated conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Dharm Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged under Section 30(d) of the Bihar Excise Act alleging recovery of 500 litres of Jawa Mahua from a location adjacent to his house, of which 495 litres were destroyed. He argued that he had no possession of the liquor, the alleged recovery was from premises not owned by him, and the complaint originated from a hostile chowkidar, raising doubts about the prosecution’s case. The State opposed the bail, contending that the seriousness of the excise offence warranted detention. The Court, applying Section 482(2) of the BNSS, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent within six weeks. It further held that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would be presumed concealed and the provisional order would not be confirmed; otherwise, the bail would be confirmed. The order thus balances the petitioner’s claim of clean antecedent against the need for judicial scrutiny before final confirmation.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in a case registered under Section 30(d) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the absence of possession and the alleged recovery from adjacent premises justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, if any, affects the confirmation of provisional anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise offence
- Section 30(d) Bihar Excise Act
- Section 482(2) BNSS
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
- police investigation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18906 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-88 Year-2025 Thana- MORKAHI District- Khagaria
======================================================
Dharm Kumar Son of Lucho Sah Resident of village- Kalwara, Ps- Amausi,
(Morkahi), Dist- Khagaria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nand Kishore Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 16-04-2026 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(d) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 500 liters of Jawa Mahua from a place behind the
house of petitioner and 495 liters of Jawa Mahua was destroyed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended 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,
but then is adjacent to his house, as such, he came to be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18906 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
2/3
implicated at the instance of Chowkidar with whom he is on an
inimical term. It is next submitted that if Chowkidar was aware
of the involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence then why
he did not inform the police prior to institution of the instant
FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is
next submitted that police in majority of the case is implicating
accused in cases relating to excise either at the instance of
Chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret
information without holding a proper investigation.
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.
500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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 Morkahi
P.S. Case No. 88 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 Court
shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18906 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
3/3
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case
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 is a
person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…