Patna High Court
Mukesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his antecedent.
Summary
Mukesh Kumar applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of 27 litres of liquor near his agricultural land. The petitioner argued that he has a clean antecedent, the alleged liquor was not found in his possession, and the accusation was based on secret information without proper investigation. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offence. The 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 The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would be withdrawn, otherwise it would be confirmed. The application was allowed, granting provisional anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) CrPC in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of possession of the alleged liquor justify granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30 Excise Act
- Section 438 CrPC
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
- bail bond
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24410 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-35 Year-2026 Thana- SHEIKHOPUR SARAI District-
Sheikhpura
======================================================
Mukesh Kumar S/O Rajendra Paswan @ Rajendra Prasad R/O Village-
Panchi, P.S- Sheikhopur Sarai, District- Sheikhpura.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bipin Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Sangeeta Sharma
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 20-04-2026 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 27 litres of liquor from a place near the field of
the petitioner.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24410 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026
2/3
petitioner, but then, is adjacent to his agricultural land and he
came to be implicated based on secret information, which is the
easiest way to implicate someone without holding a proper
investigation, 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
Sheikhopur Sarai P. S. Case No.35 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24410 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026
3/3
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 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…