Patna High Court
Kundan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to bond, sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Kundan Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, alleging recovery of 6.6 litres of liquor from a location not under his control. He argued that he was not arrested at the spot, no liquor was found in his possession, and the informant’s identity was omitted from the FIR, casting doubt on the prosecution’s case. The State opposed the bail. The Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.5,000 bond, two sureties, and compliance with conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., pending verification of his criminal antecedents. The order stipulates that if more than one prior case is found, the bail may not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in the circumstances alleged.
- Whether the lack of seizure from the petitioner’s possession and the omission of the informant’s name in the FIR affect the merits of the bail application.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- criminal antecedent
- secret informant
- bail conditions
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26711 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-48 Year-2026 Thana- MALI District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Kundan Kumar Son of Mahendra Saw R/O Village- Pandey Karma, P.S.-
Mali, District- Aurangabad
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Mukul Kumari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Brajendra Nath Pandey, A.P.P.
======================================================
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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 6.6 litres of liquor from a place
beside the expressway situated at Bharat Mala Project.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
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
and is accessible to villagers at large. It is further submitted that
petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of the local
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26711 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
2/3
person 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 the 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 appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let 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.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 Mali P.S. Case No.
48 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned
Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner
and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one
case, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26711 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
3/3
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner has antecedent of only one case in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…