Patna High Court
Ranjeet KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to conditions, pending verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Ranjeet Kumar, owner of Sahu Chicken Center, was implicated in a case alleging recovery of 59.059 litres of liquor under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022. He claimed a clean antecedent and argued that the liquor was concealed by an employee without his knowledge, and that he was not in possession at the time of arrest. The State opposed his application for anticipatory bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., pending verification of his antecedents. The order further stipulated that if any prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed, whereas a clean record would lead to immediate confirmation of the bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of possession and clean antecedent justify the grant of anticipatory bail
- Whether the conditions prescribed under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. are satisfied
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30
- clean antecedent
- possession
- Criminal Procedure Code
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23146 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-65 Year-2026 Thana- LAHERIMUHALLA District- Nalanda
======================================================
Ranjeet Kumar Son of Late Mauji Sao, Resident of Village - Magadh Colony,
P.S. - Sohsarai, District - Nalanda.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raj Kishor Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-04-2026 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 is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 59.059 litres of liquor from Sahu Chicken Center.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted
that petitioner came to be implicated based on the fact that he is
owner of the chicken center but then it is submitted that no
prudent person would use his own premises for committing an
occurrence and, thus, would create evidence against himself
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23146 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
2/3
and, hence, would get implicated and at the same time shall
bring disrepute to his business. It is next submitted that
petitioner was completely unaware that his employee without
his knowledge had concealed meager amount of liquor.
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.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 Laheri P.S. Case
No. 65 of 2026, 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
and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case,
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23146 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
3/3
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…