Patna High Court
Pankaj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court ordered provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act.
Summary
Petitioner Pankaj Kumar sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 318(4) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 read with Sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Bihar Excise Act, alleging recovery of 2,800.4 litres of liquor and seizure of a vehicle. He contended he has a clean antecedent, was not caught in possession, and the alleged contraband was recovered from land that does not belong to him, asserting that the investigation relied on secret information. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after hearing both sides, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs. 500, two sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent by the trial court. It directed that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional order would be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in the pending case under Section 318(4) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 read with the Bihar Excise Act.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 318(4), 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 318
- Bihar Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25239 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-63 Year-2026 Thana- KALYANPUR District- Samastipur
======================================================
Pankaj Kumar S/o Laxmi Mahto R/o Village - Bhutta Chowk (Gopalpur), P.S
- Kalyanpur, District - Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shubhesh Pandey, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Akbar Ali, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 21-04-2026 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 offences punishable under Section 318(4) of
the BNS, 2023 read with Sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Bihar
Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 2800.4 liters of liquor from a bamboo orchard and
one Xylo vehicle was seized.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25239 of 2026(2) dt.21-04-2026
2/3
and is not the owner of the seized vehicle and came to be
implicated based on secret information which is the easiest way
to implicate someone without holding a proper investigation.
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 for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his 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.
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
Kalyanpur P.S. Case No. 63 of 2026 subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial
Court 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 seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25239 of 2026(2) dt.21-04-2026
3/3
verification if 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)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…