Patna High Court
Suraj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that provisional anticipatory bail may be granted subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedents and compliance with conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
The petitioner, Suraj Kumar, sought anticipatory bail in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022, alleging that the alleged recovery of 42 litres of liquor was from a field belonging to another person and that he had no involvement. He argued that he has a clean antecedent and that the FIR was filed based on the testimony of a hostile chowkidar, raising doubts about the prosecution's case. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish bail bonds and two sureties, and that the trial court verify his antecedents. It further directed that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., subject to the trial court's verification.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and the circumstances of the FIR justify anticipatory bail.
- Whether the trial court should verify the petitioner’s antecedents before confirming bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022 — s. 30(a)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- FIR validity
- Section 482(2)
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39503 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-92 Year-2026 Thana- MINAPUR District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Suraj Kumar S/o Dinesh Ram @ Dinesh Sahni R/o Village -Mahadeiya ,P.S
-Minapur ,Dist -Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arun Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Akbar Ali
======================================================
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 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 42 litres of liquor from field of Sunil Bhagat. It is
next submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot as
such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and
even alleged recovery is from a place which does not belong to
the petitioner and he has no concern or relation with Sunil and
he came to be implicated at the instance of chowkidar with
whom he is on an inimical term. It is also submitted that if
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39503 of 2026(2) dt.22-06-2026
2/3
chowkidar was aware of the involvement of the petitioner in the
occurrence then why he did not inform the police prior to
institution of the instant FIR which casts an aspersion on the
case of the prosecution.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
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 Minapur P.S. Case No.92/2026, 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39503 of 2026(2) dt.22-06-2026
3/3
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.