Patna High Court

KALENDRA KUMARversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 7 May 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.

Summary

Kalendra Kumar sought anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, alleging he concealed 28 litres of liquor under a tree. He argued he has a clean antecedent, was not arrested at the spot, and the allegation stemmed from a hostile chaukidar. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., pending verification of his criminal antecedent. If any prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if he is found clean, the bail will be confirmed. The order thus provides temporary relief while the trial court verifies his antecedent.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in view of the allegations under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

Legislation cited

B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Section 30(a)
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
clean antecedent
bail conditions
Criminal Procedure Code

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30924 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-67 Year-2026 Thana- Dehri Mufassil District- Rohtas
                 ======================================================
                 KALENDRA KUMAR S/o Jitendra Singh R/o vill - Patpura, P.S.- Dehri (M),
                 Distt.- Rohtas
                                                                       ... ... Petitioner/s
                                            Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :         Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :         Mr. Damodar Prasad Tiwary, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 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 the

                   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 28 litres of liquor concealed under a tree.

                                4. 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 the alleged

                   recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner

                   and he came to be implicated at the instance of the Chawkidar

                   with whom he is on an inimical term. It is further submitted that

                   if the Chawkidar was aware of the involvement of the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30924 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026
                                            2/3




          in the occurrence then why he did not inform the police prior to

          the institution of the instant FIR which casts an aspersion on the

          case of the prosecution.

                       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 appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let 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 Dehri (M) P.S.

          Case No. 67 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down

          under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

                       7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned

          Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner

          and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case,

          it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his

          antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail

          application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order

          shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30924 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026
                                                       3/3




                     petitioner is a person with clean antecedent in that event the

                     provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.


                                                                          (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U     T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…