Patna High Court
Vijay Kumar @ Vijay ShahversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to bail‑bond conditions and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Vijay Kumar, applied for anticipatory bail anticipating arrest in a case under Sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Excise Act concerning the alleged recovery of 144 litres of liquor from a car. He argued that he was not in possession of the seized vehicle, was not arrested on the spot, and that the case against him relied solely on a confessional statement made by Anil while in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail, citing the petitioner’s prior involvement in an earlier Excise case. Justice Satyavrata Verma, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs 5,000 with two sureties, subject to the conditions of Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. The order also stipulated that the trial court must verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent and may withdraw the bail if more than one prior case is found. Consequently, the anticipatory bail application was allowed, pending verification of the antecedent.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. given the alleged offences under the Excise Act and his prior criminal antecedent.
- Whether the confessional statement of Anil recorded in police custody can form a basis to deny anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 41(1)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 438 CrPC
- criminal antecedent
- confessional statement
- bail bond
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38958 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-100 Year-2026 Thana- KISHANPUR District- Supaul
======================================================
Vijay Kumar @ Vijay Shah S/o Shiv Kumar Sah Resident of Village- Chikani
Ward No. 8, P.S. Bhapatiyahi, District Supaul
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Kamal Kishore Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rajesh Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 18-06-2026 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 41(1) 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 144 litres of liquor from a car.
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
the seized car and he came to be implicated based on
confessional statement of Anil in police custody which does not
have any evidentiary value.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38958 of 2026(2) dt.18-06-2026
2/3
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 S.T. Excise No.436 of 2026 arising out of Kishanpur P. S.
Case No.100 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
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38958 of 2026(2) dt.18-06-2026
3/3
that petitioner has antecedent of one case only, 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.