Patna High Court
Amarjit @ MithuversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application conditionally, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent and compliance with bail conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC.
Summary
Amarjit @ Mithu, a resident of Muzaffarpur, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with offences under Sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Excise Act, alleging recovery of large quantities of liquor from a vehicle and a mustard field. He contended that he was not arrested at the scene, had no conscious possession of the seized items, was not the owner of the vehicle or the field, and that the complaint was motivated by an inimical relationship with the watchman who lodged the FIR. The State opposed the bail, citing his antecedent of four criminal cases, three of which are under the Excise Act. The Patna High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.20,000 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedents. The order stipulated that if more than four prior cases are discovered, the bail would be revoked; otherwise, it would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner despite his prior criminal antecedents and the nature of the offences under the Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner is likely to abscond, tamper with evidence, or influence witnesses, justifying denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 41(1)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 438 CrPC
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
- false complaint
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28725 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-72 Year-2026 Thana- MOTIPUR District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Amarjit @ Mithu Son of Late Lalbabu Ray Resident of village - Pana
Chhapra, P.S.- Motipur, District - Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Manoj Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shyam Bihari Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 29-04-2026 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
Sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of four cases out of which three
cases are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of
226.980 litres of liquor from a Scorpio vehicle and 86.400 litres
of liquor from a mustard field.
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 and is not the owner of
the seized vehicle nor the field belongs to him and he came to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28725 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
2/3
be implicated at the instance of Chaukidar with whom he is on
an inimical term. It is further submitted that if Chaukidar was
aware of the involvement of the petitioners in the occurrence,
then why he did not inform the police prior to institution of the
present F.I.R., which casts an aspersion on the case of the
prosecution. It is next submitted that police in majority of cases
implicating innocent persons either at the behest of Chaukidar,
local person, secret information and confessional statement in a
mechanical manner without holding a proper investigation.
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.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty 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 Motipur P. S. Case No.72 of 2026, subject to
the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28725 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
3/3
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 more than four cases,
then it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of
obtaining 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 has antecedent of four cases only, in that event,
the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed
forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…