Patna High Court
Pankaj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to bond and verification of antecedents, with conditional confirmation based on the accuracy of disclosed prior cases.
Summary
The petitioners, Pankaj Kumar and Bhisa Yadav, were implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for alleged recovery of five litres of liquor near the Andhera River. They contended that they were not arrested at the spot, had no liquor in their possession, and were framed by a hostile chaukidar, also asserting that the police had not conducted a proper investigation. The State opposed their application for anticipatory bail. The Court, after hearing both sides, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.15,000 with two sureties and conditioned the confirmation of bail on verification of the petitioners’ criminal antecedents. If the petitioners are found to have more prior cases than they disclosed, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. for an offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether the petitioners’ prior criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the lack of possession of the alleged liquor at the time of arrest justifies anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 — s. 30(a)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- liquor seizure
- criminal antecedent
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar Prohibition Act
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33536 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-111 Year-2025 Thana- NOORSARAI District- Nalanda
======================================================
1. Pankaj Kumar S/o Sanjay Yadav R/o Village- Malbigha, P.S - Noorsarai,
District - Nalanda
2. Bhisa Yadav @ Bhisham Yadav @ Bhism Yadav @ Bhasam Yadav S/o Late
Jagdeo Yadav R/o Village- Malbigha, P.S - Noorsarai, District - Nalanda
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Pushpa Sinha 1, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 15-05-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act
and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of three cases under the
Excice Act and allegation is of recovery of 5 litres of liquor
from a place near Andhera River.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from their conscious possession and even the alleged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33536 of 2026(2) dt.15-05-2026
2/3
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the
petitioners and is accessible to villagers at large. It is further
submitted that petitioners came to be implicated at the instance
of the Chawkidar with whom they are on an inimical term. It is
next submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case
relating to excise the police start implicating mechanically either
at the instance of the Chawkidar, local person, confessional
statement or secret information without holding a proper
investigation of the case.
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 appearing on behalf of the petitioners, let the
petitioners, above-named, in the event of their arrest or
surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be released
on provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) each 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 Noorsarai P.S. Case No. 111 of 2025, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the
Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33536 of 2026(2) dt.15-05-2026
3/3
7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned
Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners
and if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of more
than one case and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of more than
three cases, it would be presumed that petitioners had concealed
their antecedent before this Court, at para 3 of the anticipatory
bail application, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail
order shall not be confirmed, but, if it is found on verification
that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of only one case and
petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of only three cases, 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.