Patna High Court
Nitish Kumar @ Nitesh Rai @ Nitish RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bond conditions and verification of his criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Nitish Kumar, applied for anticipatory bail in a case registered under Section 30(a)(c) of the Excise Act and Sections 112(2) and 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances (BNSS) Act, alleging that liquor was recovered from premises and a vehicle belonging to other individuals. He argued that he was not arrested at the scene, no liquor was found in his possession, and the case was based solely on a confessional statement made by Ranjit Ram while in police custody, which he contended lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail, citing the seriousness of the offences and the petitioner’s prior three cases under the Excise Act. The Court considered the lack of direct possession, the questionable reliability of the custodial confession, and the petitioner’s antecedent record. It directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.15,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of his criminal antecedents under Section 482(2) of the BNSS Act. The order further stipulated that if more than three prior cases are found, the bail would not be confirmed, whereas confirmation would follow if only three antecedent cases are verified.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in the absence of the petitioner’s possession of the seized liquor.
- Whether a confessional statement made in police custody is admissible for establishing guilt.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances (BNSS) Act — s. 112(2), 3(5), 482(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 30(c)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- confessional statement
- police custody
- criminal antecedent
- Section 482
- BNSS Act
- liquor seizure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39946 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-49 Year-2026 Thana- BARGAINIA District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Nitish Kumar @ Nitesh Rai @ Nitish Rai S/O Chandeshwar Rai @
Chandeshwar Yadav Resident of Village- Masha Aalam, P.S- Bairgania,
Distt.- Sitamarhi.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Dwij Raj
For the Opposite Party/s : Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 30-06-2026 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)(c) of the Excise Act and Sections 112(2) and 3(5)
of the B.N.S.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of three cases under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 705.9 litres of liquor from house
and orchard of Ranjit Ram and 207 litres of liquor from a
motorcycle parked in the premise of Sanjay and also from a
place behind the house.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39946 of 2026(2) dt.30-06-2026
2/3
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 not the owner of the seized vehicle, nor he has any
concern with Ranjit and Sanjay, but he came to be implicated
based on confessional statement of Ranjit in police custody,
which does not have any evidentiary value. It is next submitted
that police in majority of cases implicating innocent persons in
cases relating to excise 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.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen 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 Bairgania P. S. Case No.49 of 2026, subject to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39946 of 2026(2) dt.30-06-2026
3/3
conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
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 three 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 three 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.