Patna High Court
Pramod Das @ LadduversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent cases.
Summary
Petitioner Pramod Das @ Laddu was implicated in a case under Sections 274, 275, 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111 and 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly recovering 50.31 litres of liquor from three motorcycles. He was not arrested at the scene and no liquor was found in his possession; the allegation rests on a phone call he made to an arrested accused, making the case largely suspicion‑based. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, while the State opposed the relief. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail on condition of furnishing a bail bond of Rs 5,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent. It directed that if the petitioner is found to have more than one prior case, the bail would not be confirmed; if only one antecedent case is found, the provisional bail would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case based largely on suspicion and without seizure of contraband from the petitioner
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Bihar Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482(2)
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 111, 274, 275, 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 3(5)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- provisional bail
- criminal antecedent
- Bihar Excise Act
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
- suspicion
- Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25348 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2026 Thana- Patauna District- Madhubani
======================================================
Pramod Das @ Laddu son of Mahendra Das Resident of village- Simari PS-
Bisfi District -Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shailendra Kumar Jha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ramesh Chandra
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 25-06-2026 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 Sections 274, 275,
317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111 and 3(5) of BNS and Section 30(a)
of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 50.31 litres of liquor from three
motorcycles.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and he came to be
implicated merely for a reason that he made a call from his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25348 of 2026(3) dt.25-06-2026
2/3
mobile to the arrested accused as such the entire allegation is
based on suspicion.
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.
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 Patauna
P.S. Case No. 27 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 more
than 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
verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25348 of 2026(3) dt.25-06-2026
3/3
case in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.