Patna High Court
Sonu Pandey @ Sonu Kumar PandeyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail, granting provisional bail subject to conditions and verification of antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Sonu Pandey, 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, involving the recovery of liquor and cash. He claimed a clean antecedent and argued that the case was based solely on a confessional statement of a co‑accused, which he said lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds and sureties, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would be withdrawn; otherwise, it would be confirmed. The application for anticipatory bail was therefore allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 CrPC.
- Whether the confessional statement of a co‑accused can form the basis for denying anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged lack of ownership of the seized vehicles and clean antecedent justify bail.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- confessional statement
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37449 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-122 Year-2026 Thana- KOTWA District- East Champaran
======================================================
Sonu Pandey @ Sonu Kumar Pandey Son of Virendra Pandey Resident of
Village - Bangra, PS- Kotwa District -East Champaran, Motihari
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Dhandev Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Umesh Lal Verma
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 16-06-2026 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 is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is
of recovery of 30 litres of liquor from a Scorpio vehicle, 12
litres of liquor from a hut of Bigani Devi and 17.280 litres of
liquor from a scooty along with Rs.27,500/-.
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 is not the owner of
any of the seized vehicle, nor he has any relation or concern
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37449 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026
2/3
with Bigani Devi and he came to be implicated based on
confessional statement of Aditya Kumar in police custody which
does not have any evidentiary value.
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.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
Kotwa P. S. Case No.122 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
found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, then it
would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining
anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37449 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026
3/3
in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall
not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found that
petitioner 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.