Patna High Court
Jitendra Kumar SinhaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bond, sureties and verification of antecedents under Section 438(2) CrPC.
Summary
Jitendra Kumar Sinha 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 10,500 litres of liquor from a vacant land belonging to Sohan Sah. The petitioner contended that he was not arrested, had no possession of the liquor, and had no relationship with the land or the alleged co‑accused, asserting that the complaint arose from an enmity with a watchman. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offence. The Court, after hearing both sides, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs 5,000 and two sureties of the same amount, subject to the conditions of Section 438(2) CrPC and verification of his criminal antecedents. The order was made conditional that if the trial court finds more than one prior case, the bail would be revoked; otherwise, it would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 CrPC in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- liquor seizure
- criminal antecedent
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23468 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-36 Year-2026 Thana- RISIYAP District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Jitendra Kumar Sinha S/o- Dharmendra Lal Village- Risiup Ps- Risiup Dist-
Aurangabad
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Mukul Kumari
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Madan Kumar
======================================================
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 has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 10.500 litres of liquor from a
vacant land of Sohan Sah.
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 even alleged
recovery is from a place, which does not belong to the petitioner
and petitioner has no concern or relation with Sohan Sah and he
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23468 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
2/3
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 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.
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.5,000/- (Rupees Five 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 Risiup P. S. Case No.36 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23468 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
3/3
found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one case, then
it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of
obtaining 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 has antecedent of one case only, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…