Patna High Court
Shree Ram KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court provisionally granted anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent, under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
The petitioner, Shree Ram Kumar Dhanjay Sharma, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Sections 30(a), 41 and 56(b) of the Bihar Excise Act concerning the alleged recovery of 1,737 litres of liquor from a vehicle. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the seized liquor, and was implicated solely on a confessional statement made by Manoj while in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offences. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties, and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. If any antecedent is found, the bail would be revoked; otherwise, the provisional order would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in a case under the Bihar Excise Act?
- Whether a confessional statement made in police custody, without corroboration, can justify denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a), 41, 56(b)
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 482
- confessional statement
- clean antecedent
- seizure of liquor
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39027 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2708 Year-2026 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Patna
======================================================
Shree Ram Kumar dhanjay sharma R/o- balaji dream home apartment Flat no
-303,shree nagar no - 09 AG colony,Keshari nagar, p.s - shastrinagar,
districtpatna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anish Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shailendra Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 22-06-2026 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), 41 and 56(b) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 1737 litres of liquor from a vehicle.
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 is not the owner of the
seized vehicle and he came to be implicated based on confessional
statement of Manoj in police custody which does not have any
evidentiary value, when petitioner admittedly is a person with clean
antecedent.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39027 of 2026(2) dt.22-06-2026
2/2
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 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 Excise P.S. Case
No. 2708 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 even one case 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 is a person with
clean antecedent 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.