Patna High Court
Rajendra Ray @ Rajendra RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent and compliance with the stipulated conditions.
Summary
Petitioner Rajendra Ray sought anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of 16.98 litres of liquor from a location adjacent to his house. He argued that the liquor was not in his possession and that the investigation was based on secret information without proper inquiry. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedent within six weeks. The court stipulated that if more than one prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed; if only one prior case is found, the provisional bail would be confirmed. Thus, the petition for anticipatory bail was allowed conditionally.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the alleged recovery based on secret information justifies denial of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the trial court should verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent before confirming bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- Bihar Negotiable Instruments (or relevant) Statutes (BNSS) — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- secret information
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
- Section 482(2) BNSS
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31943 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-309 Year-2025 Thana- RIVILGANJ District- Saran
======================================================
Rajendra Ray @ Rajendra Rai son of Bali Rai Resident of village- Jantola,
Ps- Revilganj /Rivilganj / Revelganj, Dist- Saran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Sangeeta Sharma
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 13-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State, Ms. Sangeeta Sharma.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 16.980 liters of liquor from a place
near house of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended 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 came to be implicated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31943 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
2/3
based on secret information which is the easiest way to
implicate someone without holding a proper investigation.
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 for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Trial Court
within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
Provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.
5000/- (Rupees Five 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 Rivilganj
P.S. Case No.309 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial
Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and
in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more
than one case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31943 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
3/3
case only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.