Patna High Court
Ajay Rai @ PandubaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to bond, sureties, and verification of antecedents, with confirmation contingent on the outcome of that verification.
Summary
The petitioner, Ajay Rai, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for allegedly recovering 210 litres of liquor from a motorcycle. He contended that he was not in possession of the seized vehicle, was not its owner, and was implicated due to a personal dispute with the reporting chaukidar, who failed to inform police earlier. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offence and the petitioner's prior two excise cases. The Court, after hearing both sides, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties, and verification of the petitioner's criminal antecedent within six weeks. It further stipulated that if more than two prior cases are found, the bail would not be confirmed, whereas confirmation would follow if only two antecedents are verified.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in the context of alleged offences under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner's prior criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise offence
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Section 438
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21553 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-414 Year-2025 Thana- BANIAPUR District- Saran
======================================================
Ajay Rai @ Panduba S/o Tuntun Rai R/o village - Usati, P.S - Baniyapur,
District - Saran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Hemant Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Iftekhar Mahmood, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-04-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 210 litres of liquor from a
motorcycle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted
that petitioner is not the owner of the seized vehicle and came to
be implicated at the instance of the Chawkidar with whom he is
on an inimical term. It is next submitted that if the Chawkidar
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21553 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
2/3
was aware of the involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence
then why he did not inform the police prior to the institution of
the instant FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the
prosecution. It is also submitted that once an accused is
implicated in a case relating to excise the police start
implicating mechanically either at the instance of the
Chawkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret
information without holding a proper investigation of the case.
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 appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let 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.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 Baniyapur P.S.
Case No. 414 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned
Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21553 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
3/3
and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than two
cases, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner has antecedent of only two cases in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…