Patna High Court
Sunil KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that provisional anticipatory bail should be granted, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent, as the allegations did not demonstrate a clear case for arrest.
Summary
The petitioner, Sunil Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act, alleging recovery of liquor from premises adjacent to his house and a temple. He argued he had a clean antecedent and that the alleged liquor was not found in his possession, nor was the informant named in the FIR, casting doubt on the prosecution's case. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the alleged offence. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent by the trial court. The order stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed, but if the petitioner is found to have a clean record, the provisional bail would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting 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 the alleged liquor in the petitioner’s possession and the lack of an informant’s name in the FIR justify anticipatory bail?
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a) Bihar Excise Act
- Section 482(2) BNSS
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27233 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-647 Year-2025 Thana- SUGAULI District- East Champaran
======================================================
Sunil Kumar S/o Janak Sah R/o Village - Sugauli Gawn Mahavir Asthan,
Thana Sugauli, District - East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajeev Ranjan
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Manoj Kumar
======================================================
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 18.6 litres of liquor from a place behind the house
of the petitioner and 10 litres of liquor from Mahavir Mandir.
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
but then is adjacent to his house and he came to be implicated at
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27233 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
2/3
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 Sugauli P.S. Case No. 647 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 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 verification if it is found that petitioner is a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27233 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
3/3
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…