Patna High Court
Mantu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to bail bonds, sureties, and verification of their criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioners, Mantu Kumar and Sanjay Rai, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act concerning the alleged recovery of 120 litres of liquor. They argued that the liquor was not found in their possession, the recovery site did not belong to them, and the complaint was based solely on the testimony of a chowkidar and a local resident, raising doubts about the police investigation. The State opposed the bail, citing the petitioners' prior criminal antecedents under the Excise Act. The High Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on the petitioners furnishing bail bonds and sureties, and directed verification of their criminal antecedents. The order further stipulated that if the petitioners were found to have more antecedent cases than disclosed, the bail would not be confirmed for the offending petitioner.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in view of the alleged offences under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the alleged recovery of liquor from a location not owned by the petitioners and the lack of possession on their part justify granting bail.
- Whether the police investigation, based primarily on the testimony of a chowkidar and a local person, is sufficient to deny anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- Section 30(a) Bihar Excise Act
- Section 482(2) BNSS
- criminal antecedent
- police investigation
- High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32893 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-104 Year-2026 Thana- KESARIA District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Mantu Kumar S/O Krishna Yadav @ Krishna Rai @ Krishna Ray R/O Vill.-
Kadhan, P.S.- Kesariya, Dist.- East Champaran.
2. Sanjay Rai S/O Ramagya Rai R/O Vill.- Kadhan, P.S.- Kesariya, Dist.- East
Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhishek Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 14-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of two cases under the Excise
Act and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of three cases under the
Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 120 liters of liquor
from a bush near diyara area.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners were not apprehended from the spot as such nothing
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32893 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026
2/3
was recovered from their conscious possession and even alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the
petitioners and is accessible to villagers at large and they came
to be implicated at the instance of Chowkidar and local person,
but then it is submitted that if Chowkidar and local person were
aware of the involvement of the petitioners in the occurrence
then why they did not inform the police prior to institution of
the instant FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the
prosecution. It is also submitted that once an accused is
implicated in a case relating to excise, the police starts
implicating mechanically either at the instance of Chowkidar,
local person, confessional statement or secret information
without holding a proper investigation.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the
event of their 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.
15000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) each with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32893 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026
3/3
Court where the case is pending/successor court in connection
with Kesariya P.S. Case No. 104 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 petitioners and
in the event if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of
more than two cases and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of more
than three cases then it would be presumed that petitioners, for
the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed their
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed with respect to
that petitioner who had concealed his antecedent, but after
verification if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of
two cases only and petitioner no. 3 has antecedent of three cases
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.