Patna High Court
Md. SonuversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Sonu, was implicated in a case under Sections 30(a) and 36 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018 for allegedly recovering 100 litres of liquor from a riverbank location that does not belong to him. He argued that he has a clean antecedent, was not arrested at the spot, and that the liquor was not in his conscious possession. The State opposed his prayer for anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of furnishing a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and subject to verification of his criminal antecedent. If the verification reveals any prior case, the bail may be cancelled; otherwise, the provisional order will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner under the circumstances?
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of possession of the alleged liquor justify anticipatory bail?
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 482(2)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018 — s. 30(a), 36
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- prohibition law
- clean antecedent
- possession
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31915 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-573 Year-2022 Thana- ALAMGANJ District- Patna
======================================================
Md. Sonu S/o Md. Kalim R/o Mohalla - Alamganj, Machhua Toli, Police
Station- Alamganj, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raj Krishna Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Sucheta Yadav, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-05-2026 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 Sections 30(a) and
36 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.
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 a place near the bank of a
river.
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
but then is accessible to villagers at large and he came to be
implicated at the instance of the local person but then the name
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31915 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
2/3
of the person who 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
the secret information and is a person with clean antecedent.
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 Alamganj P.S. Case
No. 573 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 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31915 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
3/3
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
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
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.