Patna High Court
Rujesh RamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, subject to bond conditions and verification of antecedents.
Summary
Petitioners Rujesh Ram and Sanju Devi applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with alleged offences under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act, where liquor was recovered from a joint family house. They argued that they were not arrested at the scene, the liquor was not in their conscious possession, and the recovery was based on the testimony of a hostile watchman. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.5,000 each with two sureties and directed verification of their criminal antecedents. The order stipulated that if the antecedent checks reveal undisclosed prior cases, the bail would be revoked; otherwise, the bail would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 CrPC for alleged offences under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the circumstances of non‑arrest, joint family property and lack of conscious possession justify granting bail.
- Whether the petitioners' criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- joint family property
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35911 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-155 Year-2026 Thana- KESARIA District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Rujesh Ram S/o Krishnath Ram R/o Village - Mathiya, Ward No. 8, P.S -
Kesariya, District - East Champaran, Motihari
2. Sanju Devi W/o Awdhesh Ram R/o Village - Mathiya, Ward No. 8, P.S -
Kesariya, District - East Champaran, Motihari
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sumit Kumar Gupta
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Awadhesh Kumar Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 29-06-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioner no.1 has antecedent of one case under the Excise
Act and petitioner no.2 is a person with clean antecedent and is
a woman and the allegation is of recovery of 40 litres of liquor
from house of petitioner no.1 and 21 litres of liquor from house
of petitioner no.2 and 35 litres of liquor from house of Sonu
Sahni.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35911 of 2026(2) dt.29-06-2026
2/3
4. The 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 house in
question is a joint family property and thus, it cannot be alleged
with certainty that it were the petitioners, who had kept the
liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within
their knowledge and they came to be implicated at the instance
of Chaukidar with whom they are on an inimical term. It is also
submitted that it does not appear probable that Chaukidar would
have known who had concealed the liquor in the house.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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 Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in
the sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five 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 Kesariya P. S. Case No.155 of 2026, subject to
the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35911 of 2026(2) dt.29-06-2026
3/3
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioners 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
one case and petitioner no.2 has antecedent of even one case,
then it would be presumed that petitioners for the purposes of
obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed their 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 no.1 has antecedent of
only one case and petitioner no.2 is a person with clean
antecedent, 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.