Patna High Court
Amar Rajput @ Amar Kumar RajputversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to bond, sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
Amar Rajput applied for anticipatory bail after learning that he may be arrested in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, involving the alleged recovery of 76.3 litres of liquor from a rented room. He argued that the liquor was not in his conscious possession and that he had only one prior case under the Excise Act. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedent. If the verification shows more than one prior case, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one prior case, the bail will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case involving alleged possession of liquor recovered from a rented premises?
- Does the existence of a prior case under the Excise Act affect the grant of anticipatory bail?
- Whether the conditions imposed by the court, including verification of antecedent, are lawful under the applicable statutes.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
- liquor seizure
- rented premises
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23810 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-109 Year-2026 Thana- PATLIPUTRA District- Patna
======================================================
Amar Rajput @ Amar Kumar Rajput S/o Lakshman Prasad R/O- Shushila
Sadan West Boring Canal Road, South Anandpuri, P.S.- S.K. Puri, Distt.-
Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Jiban Pd Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Nazir Ansari, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 09-04-2026 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 has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 76.3 litres of liquor from the rented
room of the petitioner.
4. 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 the liquor
was recovered from the house in which he had taken a room on
rent but then at the instance of the landlord, the petitioner came
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23810 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
2/3
to be implicated in a mechanical manner since he had an earlier
antecedent under the Excise Act.
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.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 Patliputra P.S. Case
No. 109 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 more than 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
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner has antecedent of only one case in that event the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23810 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
3/3
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…