Patna High Court
Santosh Kumar @ Santosh RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, subject to bail‑bond conditions and verification of antecedents.
Summary
Santosh Kumar applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case registered under Sections 30(a) and 30(c) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of 200 litres of liquor and 20,000 litres of raw jaggery. The petitioner argued that the seized material was not in his possession, that the recovery took place at a public riverbank, and that a hostile watchman (chaukidar) had implicated him without prior police notification. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offences and the petitioner’s prior three excise cases. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.15,000 with two sureties and a six‑week surrender period, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. The order further stipulated that if more than three prior cases are found, the bail would be revoked, whereas confirmation would follow if only three antecedents are verified.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC should be granted in a case involving alleged offences under Sections 30(a) and 30(c) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 30(c)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
- liquor seizure
- pre‑arrest bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28933 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-48 Year-2026 Thana- GANGABRIDGE District- Vaishali
======================================================
Santosh Kumar @ Santosh Rai S/O Rajnath Singh @ Rajnath Rai R/O
Village- Diwantok Terasiya, Vaishali Ratnakar, P.S.- Ganga Bridge, Distt.-
Vaishali.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Kahkashan Alam
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Manoj Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 30-04-2026 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 30(c) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of three cases under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 200 litres of liquor from
Diwantok diyara area situated near bank of a river ganga along
with 20,000 litres of raw jawa which was destroyed.
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 even alleged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28933 of 2026(2) dt.30-04-2026
2/3
recovery is from a place, which does not belong to the petitioner
and is accessible to public at large and he came to 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 petitioner 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. It is also
submitted that petitioner in similar manner earlier also came to
be implicated in cases relating to excise.
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.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28933 of 2026(2) dt.30-04-2026
3/3
Court where the case is pending/successor Court in connection
with Ganga Bridge P. S. Case No.48 of 2026, 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 more than three 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 three cases, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…