Patna High Court
Munna Singh @ Bhupesh Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent, under Section 438(2) CrPC.
Summary
Munna Singh applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act, alleging recovery of 11 litres of liquor from a motorcycle. The petitioner claimed a clean antecedent, that he was not in possession of the seized motorcycle, and that the complaint was motivated by an inimical relationship with the informant. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent. The court stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the provisional bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged clean antecedent and lack of possession of the seized property justify granting anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
- bail bond
- criminal antecedent verification
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23453 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-63 Year-2026 Thana- PARSA District- Saran
======================================================
Munna Singh @ Bhupesh Kumar Singh S/o Shankar Singh R/o Village-
Kohara Mathiya, P.s.- Parsa, Dist- Saran at Chapra
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vijay Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Mritunjay Kumar Nirala
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 09-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is
of recovery of 11 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of
the seized motorcycle and he came to be implicated at the
instance of Chaukidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is
further submitted that if Chaukidar was aware of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23453 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
2/3
involvement of the petitioners in the occurrence, then why he
did not inform the police prior to institution of the present F.I.R.,
which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution, when
admittedly petitioner is a person with clean antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
6. 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, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum 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
Parsa P. S. Case No.63 of 2026, subject to the conditions laid
down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner 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 obtaining
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23453 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
3/3
anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court,
in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall
not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…