Patna High Court
Bittu Kumar @ Shiv Shankar KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that provisional anticipatory bail may be granted subject to a bail bond, sureties, and verification of criminal antecedents under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
Petitioners Bittu Kumar and Nitesh Kumar sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, where 89.61 litres of liquor were recovered from a motorcycle. They argued they were not caught in possession, were not owners of the vehicle, and the case relied on a confessional statement of a co‑accused taken in police custody, which they claimed lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail. The High Court granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that each petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs 15,000 with two sureties and that the trial court verify their criminal antecedents. If the antecedents exceed the prescribed limits, the bail would not be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the accused were not arrested in possession of the seized liquor.
- Whether a confessional statement made by a co‑accused in police custody can form the basis for arrest.
- Whether the petitioners' prior criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- liquor seizure
- criminal antecedent
- confessional statement
- bail bond
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40642 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-542 Year-2026 Thana- SONEPUR District- Saran
======================================================
1. Bittu Kumar @ Shiv Shankar Kumar S/o Late Nand Kishor Rai R/o Village
- Jaitiya Dudhaila Math, P.S - Sonpur, District - Saran (Chapra)
2. Nitesh Kumar @ Nitish Kumar S/o Bhushan Ray R/o Village - Jaitiya, P.S -
Sonpur, District - Saran (Chapra)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anuj Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 24-06-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner no.1 has antecedent of three cases and petitioner no.2
has antecedent of one case and allegation is of recovery of 89.61
litres of liquor from a motorcycle. It is next submitted that
petitioners were not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from their conscious possession and are not the
owners of the seized vehicle and they came to be implicated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40642 of 2026(2) dt.24-06-2026
2/3
based on confessional statement of Vinay in police custody
which does not have any evidentiary value.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the
event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.15,000/- (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 Sonepur P.S. Case No.542/2026, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the
B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial court
thereafter shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioners
and in the event if it is found that petitioner no.1 has antecedent
of more than three cases and petitioner no.2 has antecedent of
more than one case, in that event, it would be presumed that
petitioners had concealed their antecedent before this court, as
such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
confirmed with respect to those petitioners whose criminal
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40642 of 2026(2) dt.24-06-2026
3/3
antecedent does not tally but if after verification the criminal
antecedent as recorded hereinabove tallies with the petitioners 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.