Patna High Court
Vicky KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to conditions and verification of their criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioners, Vicky Kumar and Sunil Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, alleging that the liquor was recovered from a river bank not belonging to them and that they were implicated solely on secret information without proper investigation. The petitioners disclosed prior excise cases—one for Vicky and two for Sunil—and argued that no possession was found at the time of arrest. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.10,000 bail bond with two sureties, a six‑week period for surrender, and verification of the petitioners' criminal antecedents, with the bail to be confirmed or cancelled based on that verification. The court also directed the petitioners to deposit Rs.2,500 with the Patna High Court Advocate Association. The order was made under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
- Whether the alleged recovery of liquor from a public river bank and the reliance on secret information justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic and Smuggling Act — s. 482(2)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- secret information
- criminal antecedent
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Cr.P.C. Section 438
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2485 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-770 Year-2018 Thana- FATUA District- Patna
======================================================
1. Vicky Kumar S/o Anil Rai @ Anil Yadav R/o Village- Bhagwanpur, PS-
Fatuha, Distt- Patna
2. Sunil Kumar @ Jatti @ Jethi S/o Late Akhilesh Rai R/o Village-
Bhagwanpur, PS- Fatuha, Distt- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jay Ram Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kanhiya Kishor, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 27-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act
and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of two cases under the
Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 300 litres of liquor
from the bank of Punpun River.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from their conscious possession and even the alleged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2485 of 2026(2) dt.27-01-2026
2/3
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the
petitioners and is accessible to villagers at large. It is further
submitted that petitioners came to be implicated based on the
secret information which is the easiest way to implicate
someone. It is next submitted that once an accused is implicated
in a case relating to excise the police start implicating
mechanically either at the instance of the Chawkidar, local
person, confessional statement or secret information without
holding a proper investigation of the case.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, let the petitioners above-named, in
the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned trial
court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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 Fatuha
P.S. Case No. 770 of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid
down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2485 of 2026(2) dt.27-01-2026
3/3
court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and
if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of more than
one case and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of more than two
cases, it would be presumed that petitioners had concealed their
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 no. 1 has antecedent of only one case and petitioner
no. 2 has antecedent of only two cases in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
8. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners
based on instruction submits that petitioners undertake to
deposit an amount of Rs.2,500/- with the Advocate Association
of the Patna High Court.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…