Patna High Court
Shyam KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
Shyam Kumar, a resident of Ward No. 16, Saur Bazar, sought anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 135 litres of liquor and 300 litres of java‑mahua, which were reportedly destroyed. The petitioner argued that he was not caught in possession, that the information leading to his implication came from an unnamed local informant, and that he has a clean criminal antecedent. The State opposed the grant of anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, ordered provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs 500 with two sureties, to be confirmed after the trial court verifies the petitioner’s antecedent. It directed that if any prior case is discovered, the provisional bail would not be confirmed; if the antecedent remains clean, the bail would be confirmed forthwith. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act where the accused was not apprehended in possession.
- Whether the lack of a named informant and the petitioner’s clean antecedent justify the grant of provisional anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- bail bond
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482(2)
- criminal antecedent
- high court order
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23098 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-357 Year-2025 Thana- SAUR BAZAR District- Saharsa
======================================================
Shyam Kumar Son of Sunil Yadav Resident of Ward No.- 16 Suhath Bharna,
P.S.- Saur Bazar, District - Saharsa.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mritunjay Kumar Nirala, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-04-2026 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 Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 135 liters of liquor from ward no. 16 along with
300 liters of java mahua which was destroyed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing
was recovered from his conscious possession and he came to be
implicated at the instance of local person but then the name of
the person who disclosed the name of petitioner is not disclosed
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23098 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
2/3
in the FIR which casts as aspersion on the case of the
prosecution when petitioner has not been implicated based on
secret information and he is a person with clean antecedent
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 for the petitioner, 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. 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 Saur Bazar P.S. Case No. 357 of 2025 subject
to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the
BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial
Court shall verify 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 seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23098 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
3/3
verification if it is found that petitioner has clean antecedent, in
that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-
U T
Checking your session…