Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Sumant Patel @ Doma @ Sugandh PatelversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

Anticipatory bail was granted as the petitioner’s name was mentioned only in a co‑accused’s confession and no incriminating evidence was found in his possession.

Summary

The petitioner, Sumant Patel, was implicated in an excise case involving the seizure of 72 litres of illicit country-made liquor under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2018. The prosecution alleged that 9 litres were recovered from co‑accused Guddu Paswan, whose confession named the petitioner, while the remaining 63 litres were found hidden in bushes. No incriminating liquor or evidence was discovered in the petitioner’s direct possession, although he has a prior criminal antecedent for which he is out on bail. The petitioner applied for anticipatory bail, which the State opposed. The court, after hearing both sides, granted anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties, and conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., emphasizing the lack of direct material against the petitioner.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the accusation is based solely on a co‑accused’s confession and no material is recovered from the petitioner.
  • Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent precludes the grant of anticipatory bail.
  • Whether the conditions prescribed under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. are satisfied for anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • excise law
  • illicit liquor
  • Section 30(a)
  • Section 482(2)
  • co‑accused confession
  • bail conditions

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22820 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-860 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Gopalganj
                 ======================================================
                 Sumant Patel @ Doma @ Sugandh Patel S/o Santosh Patel R/o Khareya
                 Rampur, PS- Kuchaikote, District- Gopalganj

                                                                                     ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                         Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Indrajeet Bhushan, Adv.
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Akbar Ali, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   06-05-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

                           2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection

                   with Gopalganj (Excise) P.S. Case No. 860 of 2025 dated

                   25.12.2025 registered for the offence punishable under Section/s

                   30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act,

                   2018.

                           3. As per the prosecution case, the police has recovered

                   total 72.00 liter of illicit country-made liquor from the spot.

                           4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   recovery of 9 liters of liquor is alleged to have been made from

                   the possession of Guddu Paswan, on whose confession the name

                   of the present petitioner is said to have transpired in the present

                   case, while 63 liters of illicit country-made liquor is alleged to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22820 of 2026(3) dt.06-05-2026
                                             2/3




          have been recovered from the bushes where seven cartons were

          allegedly hidden. It is further submitted that the petitioner has

          one criminal antecedent in which he is on bail.

                  5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for grant

          of anticipatory bail.

                  6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

          considering the fact that the name of the petitioner has

          transpired in the present case on the basis of the disclosure made

          by the apprehended co-accused, and that nothing incriminating

          has been recovered from the conscious possession of the

          petitioner, let the petitioner, named above, be released on

          anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest or surrender before the

          court below within a period of four weeks from today on

          furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with

          two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of

          learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-IV -cum-

          Exclusive Special Excise Court No.II, Gopalganj in connection

          with Excise P.S. Case No. 860 of 2025, subject to the condition

          as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. as well as the

          following conditions:

                  (i)   One      of    the    bailors     should   be   the   family

          member/relative/known of the petitioner(s) who shall provide
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22820 of 2026(3) dt.06-05-2026
                                                          3/3




                        official document / personal affidavit to show his/her bona fide;

                                (ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every date

                        before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive

                        dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail

                        bond by the Trial Court itself;

                                (iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or

                        promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,

                        failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for

                        cancellation of the bail bonds;



                                                                             (Ajit Kumar, J)
rishi/-

U         T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.