Patna High Court
Ramdev RamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to provisional anticipatory bail subject to conditions and verification of his criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Ramdev Ram, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for allegedly possessing 25 litres of liquor recovered from the house of a person named Bharat. He asserted that he had no possession of the liquor, no relationship with Bharat, and that the complaint was motivated by an inimical chowkidar. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, arguing his clean antecedent and lack of direct involvement, while the State opposed the relief. The Court, after hearing both sides, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of furnishing bail bonds and two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in the case registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged lack of possession and clean antecedent justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 — s. 30(a)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- criminal antecedent
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40643 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-856 Year-2025 Thana- HARSIDHI District- East Champaran
======================================================
Ramdev Ram S/o- Late Moti Chand Ram Resident of vill- Mishri Tola Mehta
Tola PS- Harsidhi District- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajendra Prasad Nat
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 24-06-2026 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 (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 25 litres of liquor from house of Bharat. 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 petitioner has no concern or relation with Bharat
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.40643 of 2026(2) dt.24-06-2026
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 Harsidhi P.S. Case No.856/2025, 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.40643 of 2026(2) dt.24-06-2026
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.