Patna High Court
Bachu Kumar @ Bachu SahaniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to bond, sureties and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent, with confirmation contingent on the outcome of that verification.
Summary
The petitioner, Bachu Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, alleging recovery of 210 litres of liquor from a bamboo orchard not in his possession. He has two prior excise cases, but the alleged seizure occurred on land accessible to villagers and no arrest was made at the spot. The petitioner argued that the FIR was based on secret information and lacked proper investigation. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, stating that if more than two prior cases are found, the bail would not be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in view of the alleged offence under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- 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
- liquor seizure
- criminal antecedent
- Section 30
- Section 438
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22379 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-475 Year-2025 Thana- KANTI District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Bachu Kumar @ Bachu Sahani S/O Bashisth Sahani Resident of Village-
Pakri, P.S- Pakri, P.S- Kanti, Distt.- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sheo Kumar Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Pushpa Sinha No. 1, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-04-2026 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 (Amendment) Act, 2022.
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 bamboo
orchard.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and even the alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
and is accessible to villagers at large. It is further submitted that
petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of the local
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22379 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
2/3
person but then the name of the person who disclosed the name
of the petitioner is not disclosed in the FIR which casts an
aspersion on the case of the prosecution, when petitioner has not
been implicated based on the secret information. It is next
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 Kanti P.S. Case
No. 475 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22379 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
3/3
Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner
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…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.