Patna High Court
Arvind Ray @ Arvind KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail was granted subject to conditions, pending verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Arvind Ray, sought anticipatory bail after a case was registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of 141.840 litres of liquor from a location adjacent to his house. He argued that he has a clean antecedent, that the liquor was not found in his conscious possession, and that the informant’s identity was omitted from the FIR, casting doubt on the prosecution’s case. The State opposed the bail, contending that the allegations warranted arrest. The High Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would be revoked, but if the petitioner is found clean, the provisional bail would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act
- Whether the absence of recovery from the petitioner’s conscious possession and the omission of the informant’s name in the FIR affect the grant of anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482
- clean antecedent
- conscious possession
- FIR
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26596 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-83 Year-2026 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Arvind Ray @ Arvind Kumar S/O Panchhi Ray Resident of Village-
Damodarpur, P.S. -Paroo, District- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajeev Ranjan No. Ii
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 23-04-2026 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 the
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 141.840 litres of liquor from a place adjacent to wall
of toilet situated behind the house of the petitioner and Ajay
Kumar Pratap.
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 even the alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26596 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
2/3
but then is adjacent to his house and he came to be implicated at
the instance of local people, but then the name of the person,
who disclosed the name of the petitioner, is not disclosed in the
FIR, which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution,
when petitioner has not been implicated based on secret
information.
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 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 Excise P.S. Case No. 83 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26596 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
3/3
confirmed, but after 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)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…