Patna High Court
Neeraj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that provisional anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, subject to verification of the petitioners' criminal antecedents and compliance with the stipulated conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, Neeraj Kumar and Sanjay Kumar, sought anticipatory bail in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of 31.4 litres of liquor from a motorcycle. They argued that the liquor was not recovered from their conscious possession and that the second petitioner was unaware of the alleged misuse of his vehicle. The State opposed the bail, citing the petitioners' criminal antecedents (six cases for petitioner 1 and one for petitioner 2). The High Court granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioners surrender within six weeks, furnish bail bonds of Rs 30,000 each with two sureties, and that the trial court verify their antecedents. The order stipulated that if the verification shows more cases than disclosed, the bail would not be confirmed for the offending petitioner; otherwise, the provisional bail would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- The applicability of anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in an excise offence case.
- Whether the petitioners' criminal antecedents justify denial of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the lack of recovery of liquor from the petitioners' conscious possession affects bail eligibility.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482(2)
- criminal antecedent
- high court
- bail bond
- police investigation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21113 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-340 Year-2025 Thana- DORIGANJ District- Saran
======================================================
1. Neeraj Kumar Son of Late Fagu Mahto Resident of Village - Jagdishpur,
P.S.- Doriganj, District - Saran.
2. Sanjay Kumar Son of Late Fagu Mahto Resident of Village - Jagdishpur,
P.S.- Doriganj, District - Saran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Mili Kumari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Indu Kumari Srivastava, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 01-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of six cases and petitioner no. 2
has antecedent of one case and allegation is of recovery of 31.4
liters of liquor from a motorcycle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners were not apprehended from the spot as such nothing
was recovered from their conscious possession and petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21113 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
2/3
no. 2 came to be implicated based on the fact that he is owner of
the seized vehicle and name of the petitioner no. 1 was disclosed
by local person, but then it is submitted that no prudent person
would use his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and
thus would create evidence against himself and hence would get
implicated, it is also submitted that petitioner no. 2 was
completely unaware that his friend would misuse the vehicle in
the manner as alleged who also fled from the spot. The learned
counsel with respect to petitioner no. 1 submits that the name of
the person who disclosed the name of the petitioner no. 1 is not
disclosed in the FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the
prosecution, when petitioner no. 1 was not implicated based on
secret information. It is next submitted that of late police has
started implicating accused who have criminal antecedent other
than excise for obvious reasons without holding a proper
investigation.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the
event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Trial Court
within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21113 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
3/3
Provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.
30000/- (Rupees Thirty Hundred) each 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
Doriganj P.S. Case No. 340 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 petitioners and
in the event if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of
more than six cases and petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of more
than one case then it would be presumed that petitioners, for the
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed their
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed with respect to
that petitioner who had concealed his antecedent, but after
verification if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of
six cases only and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of one case
only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…