Patna High Court
Kishore Kumar ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent and compliance with the stipulated bond and surety requirements.
Summary
The petitioner, Kishore Kumar Chaudhary, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act concerning the alleged recovery of 486 litres of liquor from a Hyundai car. He argued that he was not caught in possession, was not the owner of the vehicle, and that his name was omitted from the FIR, suggesting a lack of direct evidence. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offence. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and appear before the trial court within six weeks. The order further stipulated that the trial court verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents; if more than one prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed, whereas confirmation would follow if only one prior case is identified.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the applicable procedural law in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the absence of the petitioner’s name in the FIR and lack of possession of the seized liquor affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedent should condition the confirmation of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482(2)
- liquor seizure
- criminal antecedent
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29910 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-58 Year-2026 Thana- PIPRA District- Supaul
======================================================
Kishore Kumar Chaudhary Son of Shree Kant Chaudhary Resident of village
- Maheshpur, Ward no.8, P.S- Pipra, Dist- Supaul
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bhuweneswar Sahu
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ahmad Ali
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 06-05-2026 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
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 486 liters of liquor from a Hyundai
car.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing
was recovered from his conscious possession and is not the
owner of the seized vehicle and he came to be implicated at the
instance of local person, but then the name of the person who
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29910 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
2/3
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 before the learned Trial Court
within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
Provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.
5000/- (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 Pipra P.S.
Case No. 58 of 2026 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 more
than 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29910 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
3/3
verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one
case only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…