Patna High Court
Kailu Kumar @ Bittu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional bail subject to bond, sureties and verification of antecedents.
Summary
Kailu Kumar applied for anticipatory bail anticipating arrest in a case under Sections 30(a) and 32 of the Excise Act. He argued that he was not in possession of the seized motorcycle and that the case against him relied solely on a confessional statement of Gaurav Kumar made in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail. The Patna High Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties, subject to the conditions of Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. The court also ordered verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, stating that if more than two prior cases are found, the bail may be withdrawn. The application for anticipatory bail was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the alleged offence under the Excise Act is based solely on a co‑accused’s confessional statement.
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of possession of the seized property justifies anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 32
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 438
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedent
- bail bond
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20994 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-91 Year-2025 Thana- PIPRIYA District- Lakhisarai
======================================================
Kailu Kumar @ Bittu Kumar Son of Deoki Yadav Resident of Village -
Walipur, P.S. - Pipariya, District - Lakhisarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjeev Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Umesh Lal Verma
======================================================
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 30(a) and 32 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 750 ml from a motorcycle.
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 is not the owner of
the seized motorcycle and he came to be implicated based on
confessional statement of Gaurav Kumar in police custody,
which does not have any evidentiary value. It is next submitted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20994 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
2/3
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 Pipariya P. S. Case No.91 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 more than two cases,
then it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20994 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
3/3
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…