Patna High Court
Guddu Das @ Guddu Kumar @ Guddu Kumar DasversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to bail bond, sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
Guddu Das sought anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in a case under the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of 882 litres of liquor. He has five prior excise cases and claims he was not caught in possession, is not the vehicle owner, and was implicated solely on a confessional statement made by Sarfraj while in police custody, which he argues lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail, citing the seriousness of the offences under Sections 30(a), 32, 36 and 41 of the Bihar Excise Act. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of a Rs. 25,000 bond with two sureties, subject to Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, and ordered the trial court to verify his criminal antecedent. If more than five prior cases are found, the bail will not be confirmed; if exactly five, the provisional order will be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case involving alleged excise offences and prior criminal antecedent.
- Whether a confessional statement made in police custody can be the sole basis for arrest.
- Whether the number of prior cases (more than five) affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a), 32, 36, 41
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedent
- Section 482
- Criminal Procedure Code
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41345 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-42 Year-2026 Thana- KARPURIGRAM District- Samastipur
======================================================
Guddu Das @ Guddu Kumar @ Guddu Kumar Das S/o Surendra Das R/V
Motipur, P.S. - Tajpur, District - Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shyam Kishore
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Nityanand
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 03-07-2026 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 offences punishable under Sections 30(a), 32, 36 and 41 of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has antecedent of five cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 882 litres of liquor from a truck.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of the
seized vehicle and he came to be implicated based on confessional
statement of Sarfraj in police custody which does not have any
evidentiary value.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41345 of 2026(2) dt.03-07-2026
2/2
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
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 trial court within a period of
six weeks from today, be released on Provisional anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five 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 Karpoorigram P.S. Case No. 42 of 2026, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court
shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event
if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than five cases
then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of seeking
anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this Court, as
such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed,
but after verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of
five cases, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall
be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.