Patna High Court
Ankul KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent and conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
Summary
Ankul Kumar applied for anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged under Section 262 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for allegedly possessing 7.5 litres of liquor. The petitioner asserted that he has a clean antecedent, was not arrested at the scene, and that villagers who allegedly caught him were not identified in the FIR, suggesting false implication. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering the petitioner's clean record and the lack of concrete evidence, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. The court directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s antecedent and to confirm the bail if no prior case is found, otherwise to cancel it.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case of alleged liquor possession under the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Excise Act
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of arrest justify the grant of bail
- Whether the conditions imposed under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. are appropriate
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 262
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 Cr.P.C.
- Excise Act
- liquor possession
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27489 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-214 Year-2025 Thana- MANIYARI District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Ankul Kumar S/o- Late Shankar Sah R/v- Fulwariya Ps- maniyari Dist-
Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Santosh Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar No. 2
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 02-07-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 262 of the B.N.S. and Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is
of recovery of 7.5 litres of liquor from possession of the
petitioner.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession rather a case has been
made out that villagers caught the petitioner with liquor but he
fled away. It is next reiterated and submitted that petitioner is a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27489 of 2026(4) dt.02-07-2026
2/3
person with clean antecedent and he has been falsely implicated
at the instance of villagers, but then the FIR does not disclose
the name of the villager who caught the petitioner and alleges
that petitioner fled away.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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 Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum 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
Maniyari P. S. Case No.214 of 2025, subject to the conditions
laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner 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 obtaining
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27489 of 2026(4) dt.02-07-2026
3/3
anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court,
in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall
not be confirmed, but if on verification, 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)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.