Patna High Court
Kundan LalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bond and verification of his antecedents, under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
The petitioner, Kundan Lal, sought anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022, concerning the alleged recovery of 256.98 litres of liquor from another person's house. He argued that he has a clean criminal record, was not present at the scene, and had no connection to the alleged offence, contending that the investigation was based on secret information. The State opposed the bail, asserting the seriousness of the offence. The Court, considering the petitioner's clean antecedent and lack of direct involvement, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. The order directs the trial court to verify the petitioner's antecedents and confirm the bail if no prior cases are found, otherwise the bail will not be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under the circumstances described.
- Whether the allegations under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022, justify denial of bail.
- Whether the conditions imposed under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. are appropriate for provisional anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022 — s. 30(a)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482(2)
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38356 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-223 Year-2026 Thana- JAKKANPUR District- Patna
======================================================
Kundan Lal S/o Darbari Lal R/o Vill.- Mohalla.- Ashok Market, Mithapur,
P.S- Jakkanpur, Dist- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amresh Kumar Sinha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 18-06-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar
Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 256.98 litres of liquor from house of Shankar Prasad.
It is next submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot
as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and
petitioner has no concern or relation with Shankar Prasad and he
came to be implicated based on secret information which is the
easiest way to implicate someone without holding a proper
investigation when petitioner admittedly is a person with clean
antecedent.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38356 of 2026(2) dt.18-06-2026
2/2
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, 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 Jakkanpur
P.S. Case No.223/2026, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case,
in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed
his antecedent before this court, as such, the 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)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.