Patna High Court
Jitendra KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional bail subject to bond and verification of antecedents.
Summary
The petitioners, six individuals from Gaya district, applied for anticipatory bail under Sections 318(4), 112(2) and 61(1) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, Section 11 of the Bengal Gambling Act, 1867 and Section 30(A) of the Excise Act, alleging that liquor (2.55 litres) was recovered near Ajay Chauhan’s house and 22 vehicles owned by them were seized. They contended that they were not arrested at the spot, had no conscious possession of the liquor, and that ownership of the vehicles did not imply participation in the alleged offence. The State opposed the bail, arguing that the facts warranted detention. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs 500 each with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC, directing verification of the petitioners’ criminal antecedents. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is found, the bail would be revoked; otherwise, the provisional bail would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC should be granted to the petitioners despite the alleged recovery of liquor and seizure of vehicles.
- Whether the mere ownership of the seized vehicles and proximity to the alleged crime scene constitute sufficient grounds to deny bail.
- Whether the evidence presented establishes a prima facie case warranting denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bengal Gambling Act, 1867 — s. 11
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 112(2), 318(4), 61(1)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(A)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- liquor seizure
- excise law
- gambling act
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38519 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-144 Year-2026 Thana- GAYA MUFASIL District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Jitendra Kumar S/O Girani Prasad R/O Village - Baradih P.S.- Muffasil,
District - Gaya ji
2. Uday Kumar S/O Nathun Yadav R/O Village- Chutiya Pandey, PS-
M.M.C.H., Distt-Gaya ji
3. Puniya Devi W/O Rayat Bind R/O Village - Ajamatganj, P.S.- Paraiya,
District - Gaya ji
4. Shailesh Kumar S/O Ramotar Prasad R/O Village - Lakhanpur, P.S.-
Muffasil, District - Gaya ji
5. Ajay Kumar Chaudhary @ Ajay Chaudhary S/O Barho Chaudhary R/O
Village - Bhusunda, P.S.- Muffasil, District - Gaya ji
6. Shankar Bind S/O Ishwar Bind R/O Village - Bhusunda, P.S.- Muffasil,
District - Gaya ji
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pushp Raj Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Nand Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 18-06-2026 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 Sections
318(4), 112(2) and 61(1) of the B.N.S. and Section 11 of the
Bengal Gambling Act, 1867 and Section 30(A) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and petitioner
no.3 is a woman and the allegation is of recovery of 2.55 litres of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38519 of 2026(2) dt.18-06-2026
2/3
liquor from a place near the gate of Ajay Chauhan’s house and 22
vehicles parked near the gate of the said house were also seized.
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 alleged
recovery is from a place, which does not belong to the petitioners,
but then is adjacent to the house of Ajay Chauhan and they came
to be implicated based on the fact that they are owner of six of the
seized vehicles. It is next submitted that no prudent person would
use their own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would
create evidence against themself and hence, would get implicated.
It is also submitted that it does not appear probable that 22
vehicles would have been used for carrying 2.55 liquor which
amply demonstrates that the manner in which police investigates
and implicates.
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.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) each with two sureties of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38519 of 2026(2) dt.18-06-2026
3/3
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court
where the case is pending/ successor Court in connection with
Muffasil P. S. Case No.144 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 petitioners shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the event, if it is
found that petitioners have 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 petitioners
are persons 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.