Patna High Court
Rahul Kumar Singh @ Rahul KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to a Rs. 1,00,000 bond, two sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent cases.
Summary
The petitioner, Rahul Kumar Singh, sought anticipatory bail in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act concerning the alleged recovery of 8,863.56 litres of liquor from a truck. He argued that he was not caught in possession, was not the owner of the seized liquor, and was implicated solely on secret information, a pattern he claimed existed in his prior 24 excise cases. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, requiring a bail bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. If the petitioner is found to have more than 24 prior cases, the bail will not be confirmed; if exactly 24, the provisional order will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, pending verification by the trial court.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act where the accused was not caught in possession.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent of 24 excise cases affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the conditions imposed under Section 482(2) of the BNSS are appropriate for provisional anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- secret information
- criminal antecedent
- provisional bail
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482(2)
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33620 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-44 Year-2026 Thana- INDUSTRIAL AREA District- Vaishali
======================================================
Rahul Kumar Singh @ Rahul Kumar S/o Ratnesh Kumar Singh @ Ratnesh
Singh R/o Vill. - Madhopur Nijhama @ Nizma, P.S. - Mahua, Distt. - Vaishali.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anish Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Pushpa Sinha.1
======================================================
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 24 cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 8863.56 liters of liquor from a truck.
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 is not the
owner of the seized and came to be implicated based on secret
information which is the easiest way to implicate someone. It is
also submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33620 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026
2/3
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. It is also submitted that petitioner, earlier in
similar manner, came to be implicated in cases relating to
Excise.
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.
100000/- (Rupees One Lakh) 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 Industrial
Area P.S. Case No. 44 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 24
cases 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.33620 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 24 cases only, in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.