Patna High Court
Rahul KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court ordered provisional anticipatory bail subject to conditions, pending verification of the petitioner’s antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Rahul Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 274 and 275 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, alleging that 237.165 litres of liquor were recovered from a banana orchard adjacent to his house and that no liquor was found in his possession. He asserted a clean criminal record and argued that the investigation was inadequate and based on secret information. The State opposed the grant of anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his antecedents. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed immediately. The decision was made under Section 482(2) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances alleged.
- Whether the allegations under Sections 274, 275 B.N.S. and Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act justify denial of anticipatory bail.
- Whether Section 482(2) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act is applicable for granting provisional anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 274, 275, 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- clean antecedent
- Section 274 B.N.S.
- Section 275 B.N.S.
- Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 482(2) B.N.S.
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30718 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-149 Year-2026 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali
======================================================
Rahul Kumar S/o Kishori Ray R/o Vill. - Mahua Singh Rae, PS - Mahua,
Distt. - Vaishali.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anish Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ramesh Chandra
======================================================
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 offence punishable under Sections 274, 275 of
BNS and Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 237.165 litres of liquor from a Banana orchard
behind the house of the petitioner. It is next submitted that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and even 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
based on secret information which is the easiest way to
implicate someone, without holding a proper investigation,
when petitioner admittedly is a person with clean antecedent.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30718 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
2/2
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. 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 Mahua P.S. Case No.149/2026, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one
case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had
concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
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)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…