Patna High Court
Pappu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court provisionally granted anticipatory bail subject to bond, sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Pappu Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after police alleged that 432 litres of liquor were recovered from a poultry farm adjacent to his property and 45 litres from his house, along with the seizure of a motorcycle, under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act. He contended that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, the house was joint family property, and that the police obtained incriminating statements from his wife and brother under pressure. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and appear before the trial court within six weeks. It further directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, stating that if more than two prior cases are found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional bail would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act given the alleged seizure of liquor and a motorcycle.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent disqualifies him from obtaining anticipatory bail.
- Whether the alleged lack of conscious possession and joint family ownership of the house negate the charge.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- possession
- joint family property
- prior convictions
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21174 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-448 Year-2025 Thana- RAJAPAKAR District- Vaishali
======================================================
Pappu Kumar Son of Late Gaya Rai Resident Of Village- Bakhari Baree,
Ward No 7, Ps -Rajapakar, Dist -Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shivjee Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ahmad Ali
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 01-04-2026 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 has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 432 litres of liquor from the poultry
farm of the petitioner and from a place near a canal along with
45 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner and one
motorcycle was seized.
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 is not the owner of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21174 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
2/3
the seized motorcycle and the house in question is a joint family
property as such it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was
petitioner who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept
in the house was within knowledge of the petitioner. It is next
submitted that though it is alleged that 432 litres of liquor was
recovered from the poultry farm of the petitioner, but the same
was seized from a place adjacent to the poultry farm and since
petitioner has antecedent under the Excise Act as such he came
to be implicated and police in order to implicate the petitioner
got his name confessed from the apprehended accused Khusboo
Kumari (wife of the petitioner) and Raushan Kumar (brother of
the petitioner).
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 before the learned trial court within a
period of six weeks from today, be released on Provisional
anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds 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 Rajapakar P.S. Case
No. 448 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21174 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
3/3
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 more than two
cases 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
confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner has
antecedent of two cases in that event the provisional anticipatory
bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…