Patna High Court
Raushan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional bail subject to conditions and verification of antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Raushan Kumar, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of 5.25 litres of liquor from a public banana orchard. He asserted a clean criminal record and argued that the alleged liquor was not in his possession and the orchard is accessible to the public, contending that the investigation was based on secret information. The State opposed the anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of his antecedents and compliance with Section 438(2) conditions. The Court clarified that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would be presumed obtained by concealment and the order would not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional bail would be confirmed. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted under Section 438 CrPC in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act
- Whether the alleged recovery of liquor from a public orchard justifies denial of anticipatory bail
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent warrants the grant of anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- bail conditions
- clean antecedent
- liquor recovery
- public orchard
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19178 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-259 Year-2025 Thana- MOHANPUR District- Samastipur
======================================================
Raushan Kumar S/o Saroj Rai @ Saroj Ray Resident of village- Telgama,
Ward No.10, Police Station- Mohanpur, District- Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pramod Kumar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Bishweshwar Ram
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 26-03-2026 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
Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is
of recovery of 5.25 litres of liquor from a banana orchard.
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 an orchard, which does not belong to the
petitioner and is accessible to public at large and he came to be
implicated based on secret information, which is the easiest way
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19178 of 2026(2) dt.26-03-2026
2/3
to implicate someone 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.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
Mohanpur P. S. Case No.259 of 2025, subject to the conditions
laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
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 even one case, 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19178 of 2026(2) dt.26-03-2026
3/3
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.