Patna High Court

Amit KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 26 March 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The court held that the petitioner is entitled to provisional anticipatory bail subject to conditions and verification of his antecedent.

Summary

The petitioner, Amit Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of liquor from a riverbank and his cattle shed. He argued that he has a clean antecedent, that the liquor was not found in his conscious possession, and that the shed is accessible to villagers, suggesting possible framing. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent by the trial court. If any antecedent is discovered, the provisional bail would be revoked; otherwise, it would be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
Whether the circumstances of alleged possession justify granting anticipatory bail despite lack of recovery from the petitioner’s conscious possession.

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Bihar Excise Act
Section 30(a)
Section 482(2)
clean antecedent
provisional bail
High Court

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19805 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-98 Year-2025 Thana- PACHMAHLA District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Amit Kumar S/o Late Nagina Singh R/o Village- Nauranga Jalalpur, PS-
                 Panchmahala, Distt- Patna

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr.Kundan Kumar Ojha
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Ms.Veena Kumari Jaiswal
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   26-03-2026               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 is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 5 litres of liquor from a bush near bank of Ganga

                   river and 15 litres of liquor from a cattle shed 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 cattle

                   shed is a place outside the house and thus is accessible to

                   villagers at large. It is next submitted that no prudent person
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19805 of 2026(2) dt.26-03-2026
                                            2/3




          would use his own premises for committing an occurrence and

          thus would create evidence against himself and hence would get

          implicated. It is further submitted that it appears that someone

          inimical to the petitioner concealed meagre amount of liquor

          without knowledge of petitioner and his family members.

                   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 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 Panchmahla P.S. Case No. 98 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

          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
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19805 of 2026(2) dt.26-03-2026
                                                          3/3




                        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)
Sumit/-

U         T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…