Patna High Court
Vinay Shankar Chaudhary @ Lallu ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bond, sureties and verification of his antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Vinay Shankar Chaudhary, feared arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, relating to the alleged recovery of ten litres of liquor from another person, Angan Kumar. He argued that he had no conscious possession of the liquor and that the only evidence against him was a confessional statement made by Angan Kumar while in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedents. If any antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if he is found to have a clean record, the bail will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in the present case under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.
- Whether the confessional statement of a co‑accused made in police custody can be relied upon to deny bail.
- Whether the absence of conscious possession and a 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)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- confessional statement
- clean antecedent
- bail bond
- surety
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40726 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-86 Year-2026 Thana- SANDESH District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Vinay Shankar Chaudhary @ Lallu Chaudhary Son of Dev Kumar Chaudhary
Resident of Village - Chilhaush, P.S.- Sandesh, District - Bhojpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Shaheen Begum, A.P.P.
======================================================
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 the 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 10 litres of liquor from possession of Angad Kumar.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted that
petitioner came to be implicated based on the confessional statement
of Angad Kumar in police custody which does not have any
evidentiary value in the eye of law.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40726 of 2026(2) dt.24-06-2026
2/2
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let 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 Sandesh P.S. Case No. 86 of 2026, subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned
Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and
if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, it would
be presumed that petitioner had concealed his antecedent before this
Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail application in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if it is
found on verification that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent
in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.