Patna High Court
Arvind Ray @ Arvind Rai @ Arvind Kumar Rai @ Arvind KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail with conditions, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
Arvind Ray sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act, where police alleged recovery of 90 litres of liquor from Lalo Devi's house. The petitioner argued he was not arrested on the spot, had no possession, and the case was based on a confessional statement made by Lalo Devi in custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. He also disclosed five prior criminal cases, four under the Excise Act. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, applying Section 482(2) of the BNSS, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs. 25,000 bond, two sureties, and a six‑week surrender, directing the trial court to verify the petitioner’s antecedent and conditionally confirm the bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in view of the alleged offences under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the confessional statement of Lalo Devi recorded in police custody can be treated as substantive evidence for the charge.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482(2)
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- confessional statement
- Section 30
- Section 482
- criminal antecedent
- Bihar Excise Act
- Bihar Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38001 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-56 Year-2026 Thana- BHAPTIAHI District- Supaul
======================================================
Arvind Ray @ Arvind Rai @ Arvind Kumar Rai @ Arvind Kumar S/o Ram
Lakhan Rai R/o Village - Chhithi Hanuman Nagar Ward no. 08, P.S -
Bhaptiyahi, District - Supaul
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pramod Mishra
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Renu Kumari
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-06-2026 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 the
petitioner has antecedent of five cases out of which four cases
are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 90
litres of liquor from the house of Lalo Devi.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and even the alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38001 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
2/3
and petitioner has no relation or concern with Lalo Devi and he
came to be implicated based on confessional statement of Lalo
Devi in police custody which does not have any evidentiary
value.
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. 25,000/- (Rupees
Twenty-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 Bhaptiyahi P.S. Case
No.56 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 five
cases then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of
seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this
Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38001 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
3/3
antecedent of five cases, 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.