Patna High Court
Sunil Rai @ Sunil KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail may be granted in the absence of arrest and possession, provided the petitioner furnishes the required bond and sureties, with the trial court to verify antecedents before confirming the bail.
Summary
Sunil Rai applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of nine litres of liquor from a location adjacent to his property. The petitioner argued that he was not arrested, no liquor was found in his possession, and the complaint was filed by a hostile watchman, casting doubt on the prosecution's case. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offence. The Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties, subject to the conditions of Section 438(2). The order was made conditional on the trial court verifying the petitioner’s criminal antecedents, with confirmation if only one prior case is found and cancellation if more than one is discovered.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for an offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the absence of arrest and lack of possession of the alleged contraband justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 30
- Criminal Procedure Code
- bail bond
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33524 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-99 Year-2026 Thana- JANDAHA District- Vaishali
======================================================
Sunil Rai @ Sunil Kumar Son of Shambhu Rai @ Shamparbhu Rai Resident
of Village- Arniya, Ward No. 12, Jandaha, Distt.- Vaishli
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shanti Bhushan Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Nazir Ansari
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 14-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 09 litres of liquor from a place
near bathan of the petitioner.
4. The 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 alleged
recovery is from a place, which does not belong to the petitioner
but then is adjacent to his bathan, as such, he came to be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33524 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026
2/3
implicated at the instance of Chaukidar with whom he is on an
inimical term. It is further submitted that if Chaukidar was
aware of the involvement of the petitioners in the occurrence,
then why he did not inform the police prior to institution of the
present F.I.R., which casts an aspersion on the case of the
prosecution.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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 Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum of Rs.5,000/- (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 Jandaha P. S. Case No.99 of 2026, subject to the conditions
laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33524 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026
3/3
found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one case, then
it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of
obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before
this Court, in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail
order shall not be confirmed, but if on verification, 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)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.