Patna High Court
Chotu Kumar @ Anurag KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, subject to conditions and verification of antecedents.
Summary
Petitioners Chotu Kumar and Aniket Kumar 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 15.3 litres of liquor. They argued that they were not arrested at the spot, the liquor was recovered from a public place, and the FIR did not disclose the informant, casting doubt on the prosecution's case. 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.5,000 each with two sureties, subject to verification of their criminal antecedents. The order stipulated that if petitioner No.1 is found to have more than one prior case or petitioner No.2 has any prior case, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 CrPC for an offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the absence of arrest and the alleged recovery of liquor from a public place justify granting anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioners' criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
- public place
- liquor recovery
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40550 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-283 Year-2026 Thana- RAMPUR District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Chotu Kumar @ Anurag Kumar S/o Prabhat Ranjan @ Nigam Prasad
Resident of Village- Jail Road, Rampur, P.S.- Rampur, District- Gayaji
2. Aniket Kumar S/o Prabhat Ranjan @ Nigam Prasad Resident of Village- Jail
Road, Rampur, P.S.- Rampur, District- Gayaji
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sunil Kumar Yadav
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Kanhiya Kishor
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 23-06-2026 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
Sections 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioner no.1 has antecedent of one case under the Excise
Act and petitioner no.2 is a person with clean antecedent and the
allegation is of recovery of 15.3 litres of liquor from a place
near bank of a canal.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40550 of 2026(2) dt.23-06-2026
2/3
recovered from their conscious possession and even alleged
recovery is from a place, which does not belong to the
petitioners and is accessible to public at large and they came to
be implicated at the instance of local person, but the name of the
person, who disclosed the name of the petitioners is not
disclosed in the F.I.R., which casts an aspersion on the case of
the prosecution. Since petitioners have not been implicated
based on secret information.
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.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) 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 Rampur P. S. Case No.283 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40550 of 2026(2) dt.23-06-2026
3/3
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 petitioner no.1 has antecedent of more than
one case and petitioner no.2 has antecedent of even one case,
then it would be presumed that petitioners for the purposes of
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 petitioner no.1 has antecedent of
only one case and petitioner no.2 is a person 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.