Patna High Court
Rahul SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
The petitioner, Rahul Singh, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case registered under Sections 30(a), 30(c), 36 and 56(c) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of liquor and raw materials from a bamboo orchard. The petitioner asserted that he has a clean antecedent, was not arrested at the spot, and had no conscious possession of the alleged contraband, which was recovered from a public place unrelated to him. The prosecution opposed the bail, but the court considered the lack of arrest, absence of possession, and the petitioner’s clean record. The court directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of his antecedent and compliance with Section 438(2) CrPC. The order is conditional: if any antecedent is discovered, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted under Section 438 CrPC to a person alleged to have committed offences under the Excise Act without being arrested or found in possession of the contraband.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of direct involvement justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the conditions imposed, including bail bond and verification of antecedent, are appropriate under Section 438(2) CrPC.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 30(c), 36, 56(c)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 438 CrPC
- clean antecedent
- bail bond
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22508 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-10 Year-2026 Thana- CHAUTHAM District- Khagaria
======================================================
Rahul Singh S/O Rajendra Singh R/O Village- Chhoti Telauchh, P.S-
Chautham, Distt.- Khagaria.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Chandan Kumar Kashyap
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Manoj Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-04-2026 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), 30(c), 36 and 56(c) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is
of recovery of 15 litres of liquor from a bamboo orchard of
Pappu Singh along with 500 litres of raw materials which was
destroyed.
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 even alleged
recovery is from a place, which does not belong to the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22508 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
2/3
and is accessible to public at large and petitioner has no concern
or relation with Pappu Singh, but then, he came to be implicated
at the instance of local person, but the name of the person, who
disclosed the name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the F.I.R.,
which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution, when
petitioner has not been implicated based on secret information
and is a person with clean antecedent.
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.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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
Chautham P. S. Case No.10 of 2026, 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22508 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
3/3
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, then it
would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of 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 is a person with clean antecedent, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…