Patna High Court

Sunny Rai @ Sunny KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 15 January 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedents and compliance with the stipulated conditions.

Summary

The petitioner, Sunny Rai, feared arrest in a case under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act concerning the alleged recovery of 2,944.9 litres of liquor from a warehouse he does not own. He argued that the only evidence against him was a confessional statement made by a person named Raju while in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value, and that he was not found in possession of the liquor. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, while the State opposed the relief. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedents. If the verification shows more than two prior cases, the bail will not be confirmed; if exactly two, the bail will be confirmed forthwith.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in an excise case where the only evidence is a confessional statement made in police custody.
Whether the conditions imposed under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. for verification of antecedents are appropriate.

Legislation cited

B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
excise law
confessional statement
bail conditions
criminal antecedent
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.229 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-409 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Muzaffarpur
                 ======================================================
                 Sunny Rai @ Sunny Kumar S/o Pramod Rai Resident of - Harpur, P.S -
                 Kathaiya , District - Muzaffarpur

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Hemant Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Manoj Kumar
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   15-01-2026                  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 Sections 30(a), 32(3)

                   of 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 2944.900 litres of liquor from a

                   warehouse. It is next submitted that petitioner was not arrested

                   from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious

                   possession and is not the owner of the warehouse and he came

                   to be implicated based on confessional statement of Raju in

                   police custody which does not have any evidentiary value. It is

                   also submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.229 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
                                            2/3




          relating to excise, the police starts implicating mechanically

          either through chowkidar, local person, confessional statement

          or secret information without holding a proper investigation.

                       4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

          anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                       5. 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 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 Excise

          Sadar P.S. Case No.409/2025, subject to the conditions as laid

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

                       6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter

          shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the

          event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than

          two cases, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner

          had concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the

          provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if

          on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of two
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.229 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
                                                         3/3




                       cases, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall

                       be confirmed forthwith.



                                                 (Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-

U        T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…