Patna High Court
Harendra NutversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to bail bonds, sureties and verification of the petitioner's criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Harendra Nut, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged recovery of 10 litres of spirit each from a neighbor's house and a place behind his house. He argued that the alleged contraband was not found in his possession and that the investigation was based on secret information without proper inquiry, and he claimed no connection with the co-accused Kanti Devi. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish bail bonds of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedent. If more than two prior cases are found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only two, the provisional order will be confirmed. The order is subject to the conditions of Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
Issues considered
- What is the applicability of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. to the petitioner in the context of alleged offences under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act?
- Whether the alleged recovery of spirit from premises not in the petitioner's possession justifies denial of anticipatory bail?
- Whether the petitioner's criminal antecedent (two prior cases) affects the grant of anticipatory bail?
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2), 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 Cr.P.C.
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30944 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-68 Year-2022 Thana- TARAIYA District- Saran
======================================================
Harendra Nut S/o Mahajan Nut @ Mahajan R/o Village - Kharati Chainpur, P.
S - Taraiya, District - Saran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Hemant Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Nazir Ansari, 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 Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of two cases and allegation is of
recovery of 10 litres of spirit from the house of Kanti Devi and
10 litres of spirit from a place behind the house of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession even the alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
but then is adjacent to his house, as such, came to be implicated
based on the secret information which is the easiest way to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30944 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026
2/3
implicate someone without holding a proper investigation of the
case. It is further submitted that petitioner has no concern or
relation with Kanti Devi.
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.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten 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 Taraiya P.S. Case
No. 68 of 2022, 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 more than two
cases, 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.30944 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026
3/3
petitioner has antecedent of only two cases in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.