Patna High Court
Dinesh RamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional bail subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Summary
The petitioner, Dinesh Ram, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of 20 litres of liquor from a public place near a peepal tree. He has four prior cases under the Excise Act, and the alleged recovery was not from his conscious possession. The informant was a watchman (chaukidar) with whom the petitioner has an inimical relationship, raising doubts about the motive of the complaint. The State opposed the bail, but the court considered the lack of possession, the public nature of the location, and the petitioner’s antecedent. The court granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of a Rs.20,000 bond with two sureties and directed verification of his criminal antecedent, with the bail to be confirmed only if he has no more than four prior cases.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act where the petitioner has four prior cases.
- Whether the absence of recovery from the petitioner’s possession and the public nature of the alleged location justify granting bail.
- Whether the informant’s inimical relationship with the petitioner affects the credibility of the prosecution’s case.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438
- Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
- public place
- informant
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39919 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-51 Year-2026 Thana- BANIAPUR District- Saran
======================================================
Dinesh Ram Son of Late Narsingh Ram R/o Village- Nagdiha P.S.- Baniyapur
District -Saran at Chapra
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Avinash Kumar Pandey
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Shaheen Begum
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 23-06-2026 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
Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of four cases under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 20 litres of liquor from a place
near a peepal tree.
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 even alleged
recovery is from a place, which does not belong to the petitioner
and is accessible to public at large and he came to be implicated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39919 of 2026(2) dt.23-06-2026
2/3
at the instance of Chaukidar with whom he is on an inimical
term. It is further submitted that if Chaukidar was aware of the
involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence, then why he did
not inform the police prior to institution of the present F.I.R.,
which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is
next submitted that police in majority of cases implicating
innocent persons either at the behest of Chaukidar, local person,
secret information and confessional statement in a mechanical
manner without holding a proper investigation.
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.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty 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 Baniyapur P. S. Case No.51 of 2026, subject to
the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39919 of 2026(2) dt.23-06-2026
3/3
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 four cases,
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
that petitioner has antecedent of four cases 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.