Patna High Court
Ajay RayversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that provisional anticipatory bail may be granted subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent and compliance with the conditions under Section 438 CrPC and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S.
Summary
The petitioner, Ajay Ray, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, alleging recovery of 21 litres of liquor near the Balan River. He argued that he was not arrested at the spot, had no liquor in his possession, and was implicated by a hostile chawkidar without proper investigation. The State opposed the bail. The Court considered the petitioner's claim of lack of possession, the role of the chawkidar, and the petitioner’s prior two criminal cases. It granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and directed verification of his antecedents. If more than two prior cases are found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only two, it will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged criminal antecedent affects 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
- Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
- chawkidar
- liquor seizure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22587 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-501 Year-2025 Thana- DALSINGHSARAI District- Samastipur
======================================================
Ajay Ray S/o Late Autari Rai @ Late Awtari Ray R/o Village - Keota, P.S -
Dalsinghsarai, District - Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mahendra Pratap, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nand Kumar, 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 (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of two cases and allegation is of
recovery of 21 litres of liquor from a place near Balan River.
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
Chawkidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is next
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22587 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
2/3
submitted that if the Chawkidar 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 off late the police have started implicating accused with
criminal antecedent in cases relating to excise for obvious
reasons through the Chawkidar and local person 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 Dalsingsarai P.S.
Case No. 501 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.22587 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…