Patna High Court
Ranjeet KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent, with confirmation contingent on a clean record.
Summary
The petitioner, Ranjeet Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged recovery of 200 litres of liquor from two motorcycles. He argued he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor, and was not the owner of the vehicles, claiming he was implicated by a local person. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, requiring a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent by the trial court. If any antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional order will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the Bihar Narcotic and Dangerous Substances Act.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in the case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged clean antecedent and lack of possession justify granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic and Dangerous Substances Act — s. 482(2)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- liquor seizure
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
- Cr.P.C. Section 438
- Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33911 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-438 Year-2025 Thana- FATEHPUR District- Gaya
======================================================
Ranjeet Kumar Son of Sanjay Yadav Resident of Village- Macharak, P.S.-
Fatehpur, District- Gaya Ji
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Syed Asgher Najmi, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 15-05-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 200 litres of liquor from two different motorcycles.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted
that petitioner is not the owner of any of the seized vehicles and
came to be implicated at the instance of the local person but
then it is submitted that if the local person was aware of the
involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence then why he did
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33911 of 2026(2) dt.15-05-2026
2/3
not inform the police prior to the 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 appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let the petitioner,
above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a
period of six weeks from today, be released on provisional
anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500/- (Rupees
Five Hundred) 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 Fatehpur P.S. Case
No. 438 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.
7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned
Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner
and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case,
it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
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 is a person with clean antecedent in that event the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33911 of 2026(2) dt.15-05-2026
3/3
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.