Patna High Court
Ramu ChaudharyversusThe State of bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to bail bonds, sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
The petitioner, Ramu Chaudhary, sought anticipatory bail after the police registered a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly recovering 16 litres of liquor from a bamboo orchard adjacent to his house. He argued that the liquor was not found in his possession, the orchard did not belong to him, and the complaint originated from a hostile watchman, raising doubts about the prosecution’s case. The State opposed the bail, contending that the petitioner had prior excise cases. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, conditioning it on a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and directing the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. It further held that if more than two prior cases are found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional order would be made final.
Issues considered
- The petitioner’s entitlement to anticipatory bail in a case under the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the alleged recovery of liquor from property not owned by the petitioner justifies arrest.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent exceeds two cases, affecting bail eligibility.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482(2)
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26367 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-370 Year-2025 Thana- DORIGANJ District- Saran
======================================================
Ramu Chaudhary S/O Late Jagadish Chaudhary R/O Village- Mahaddipur,
P.s- Doriganj, District- Saran at Chapra
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Chandra Mohan Jha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Yogendra Kumar Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 22-04-2026 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 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 16 liters of liquor from a bamboo
orchard near the house of the petitioner.
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,
but then is adjacent to his house and he came to be implicated at
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26367 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
2/3
the instance of Chowkidar with whom he is on an inimical term.
It is also submitted that if Chowkidar was aware of the
involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence then why he did
not inform the police prior to institution of the instant FIR
which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.
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.
10000/- (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 Doriganj
P.S. Case No. 370 of 2025 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 two cases then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26367 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
3/3
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 two
cases only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…