Patna High Court
Nunu Lal Bind @ Nunu Lal MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The High Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Nunu Lal Bind, feared arrest in a case (PS Case No.484/2025) alleging possession of 100 litres of liquor under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022. He contended that he had no conscious possession of the liquor, the alleged recovery site was a public place, and he possessed a clean criminal record. The State opposed his application for anticipatory bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.500 and two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedents by the trial court. The order stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure given the alleged offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 and his claim of clean antecedent.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 — s. 30(a)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- bail bond
- surety
- High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30844 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-484 Year-2025 Thana- MOKAMAH District- Patna
======================================================
Nunu Lal Bind @ Nunu Lal Mahto S/O Sri Jai Ram Bind Resident of Vill.-
Sultanpur Kanhaipur, Ward no- 01, P.S- Mokama, Dist- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kumar Manglam
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Choubey Jawahar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 07-05-2026 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 Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 100 litres of liquor from Sultanpur Barahpur Diyara.
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 and is accessible to public at large 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.30844 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026
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 Mokama P.S. Case No.484/2025, 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…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.