Patna High Court
Abhimanyu Kumar @ Munnu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to bail bond, sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Abhimanyu Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of 40.38 liters of liquor from a location adjacent to his property. He argued that the liquor was not in his possession and that the informant’s delay in reporting raised doubts about the prosecution’s case. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, requiring a bail bond of Rs. 5,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents within six weeks. If more than one prior case is found, the bail will be cancelled; if only one prior case, the bail will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act?
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged lack of possession of the liquor and the informant’s delay affect the merits of the bail application?
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30
- Section 482
- criminal antecedent
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32878 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-215 Year-2026 Thana- RAMKRISHNANAGAR District- Patna
======================================================
Abhimanyu Kumar @ Munnu Kumar S/o Sri Arjun Yadav Resident of -
Mahda Shiv Nagar, Road No. 2, P.S. Ram Krishna Nagar, District - Patna,
Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Aishwarya Shankar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 14-05-2026 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 Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of
recovery of 40.380 liters of liquor from a place outside the
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,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32878 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026
2/3
but then is adjacent to his boundary and he came to be
implicated at the instance of local person, but then it is
submitted that if local person was aware of the involvement of
the petitioner in the occurrence then why he did not inform the
police prior to 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 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
Ramkrishna Nagar P.S. Case No. 215 of 2026 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32878 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026
3/3
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 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.