Patna High Court
Krishna Kevat @ Krishn KewatversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail could not be granted as the petitioner’s criminal antecedents warranted denial of the privilege.
Summary
Krishna Kevat applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, where 50 litres of illicit liquor were seized after a raid. The prosecution alleged that the liquor was thrown into a pond from the petitioner’s premises, and the informant’s complaint led to the FIR. The petitioner argued that he was being implicated solely because of his prior criminal record and that the seizure occurred near a pond, not directly implicating him. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the material’s disposal into the pond and the petitioner’s similar past offences. The court, noting the petitioner’s criminal antecedents of the same nature, declined to extend anticipatory bail and ordered the application rejected, directing that if the petitioner surrenders within eight weeks the matter will be heard promptly.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act given his criminal antecedents.
- Whether the seizure of liquor from the vicinity of a pond implicates the petitioner in the offence.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal antecedent
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- seizure of illicit liquor
- bail jurisprudence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20798 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-106 Year-2025 Thana- Amhara District- Lakhisarai
======================================================
Krishna Kevat @ Krishn Kewat Son of Dhaneshwar Kewat Resident of
Village - Gangta, P.S. - Amahra, District - Lakhisarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 08-04-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Amhara P.S. Case No. 106 of 2025 for the
offence under section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise
Act lodged on 13.10.2025 by the informant, Vinod Kumar
Yadav.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that on secret information, the place of the petitioner was raided
but the sack was thrown towards the pond and there is
recovery/seizure of 50 liters of country-made liquor. This led to
the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that only
because of criminal antecedent, he has been implicated and the
recovery is from a place near the pond.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20798 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
2/2
5. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that the
said material thrown towards the pond and the role of the
petitioner especially when he has criminal antecedent cannot be
ignored.
6. Considering the submissions of the parties as also
that he has criminal antecedents of the same nature, this Court is
not inclined to extend him privilege of anticipatory bail.
7. The anticipatory bail application stands rejected.
8. If, however, the petitioner surrenders within eight
weeks from today, the concerned Court shall look into the
matter as also the place of recovery and dispose of the petition
preferably on the same day.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Adnan/-
U T
Checking your session…