Patna High Court
Mithlesh Kumar @ Mithlesh Kumar Yadav @ Mithilesh Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to verification of their antecedent and compliance with Section 438(2) CrPC.
Summary
The petitioners, Mithlesh Kumar and Sanjit Kumar, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act alleging recovery of 154.890 litres of liquor. They argued they have clean antecedents, were not arrested at the spot, and the recovery was from a place not belonging to them, relying on a confessional statement of a third party taken in police custody which they claimed lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioners be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 500 each with two sureties, subject to verification of their criminal antecedent and compliance with Section 438(2) CrPC. The court clarified that if any antecedent is found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 438 CrPC in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the confessional statement of a third party taken in police custody can form the basis for denying bail.
- Whether the petitioners' alleged lack of possession and clean antecedent justify granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- confessional statement
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39394 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-389 Year-2026 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
1. Mithlesh Kumar @ Mithlesh Kumar Yadav @ Mithilesh Kumar Yadav s/o
Jailal Rai R/o Village- Jagarnathpur dokra ,P.S -Saraiya ,District-
Muzaffarpur
2. Sanjit Kumar @ Sanjeet Kumar S/o Deepu Ray @ Tipu Rai R/o Village-
Ataraliya, Gopalpur Neura, Ward no- 13, ,P.S -Saraiya ,District-
Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Yugal Kishore
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Anzarul Haque Sahara
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 22-06-2026 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
Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the
allegation is of recovery of 154.890 litres of liquor from a place
behind the paltry farm of Vikki Kumar.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39394 of 2026(2) dt.22-06-2026
2/3
recovery is from a place, which does not belong to the petitioner
and he came to be implicated based on confessional statement of
Vikki Kumar in police custody which does not have any
evidentiary value.
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 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.389 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39394 of 2026(2) dt.22-06-2026
3/3
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.