Patna High Court
Pankaj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional bail subject to conditions and verification of antecedents.
Summary
Pankaj Kumar applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with alleged offences under Sections 30(a) and 37(C) of the Excise Act. He argued that he was not arrested, that the liquor was recovered from a hut not belonging to him, and that the complaint was based on the testimony of a watchman with whom he has a hostile relationship. The State opposed the bail. The Patna High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish bail bonds of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and appear before the trial court within six weeks. The order is subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent; if more than one prior case is found, the bail may be withdrawn, otherwise it will be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the accused claims no arrest and no possession of the alleged contraband.
- Whether the existence of prior criminal antecedents precludes the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 37(C)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 438
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37889 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-38 Year-2026 Thana- OBRA District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Pankaj Kumar S/o Sunil Prasad Resident of Village - Gira, P.S.- Obra,
District- Auranagbad
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Binod Kumar Pandey
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Ataur Rahman
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-06-2026 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
Sections 30(a) and 37(C) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 08 litres of liquor from a hut
near a brick-kiln.
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 even alleged
recovery is from a place, which does not belong to the petitioner
and he came to be implicated at the instance of Chaukidar with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37889 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
2/3
whom he is on an inimical term. It is next submitted that police
in majority of cases implicating innocent persons either at the
behest of Chaukidar, local person, secret information and
confessional statement in a mechanical manner without holding
a proper investigation.
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.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) 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 Obra P. S. Case No.38 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 more than one case, then
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37889 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
3/3
it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of
obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his 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 has antecedent of only one case, 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.